F
Coping as a Concept in Family Theory
Patricia A. H. Dyk'*
Jay D. Schvaneveldt
With the increased interest in stress theory, "coping" has becomea
popular concept in lamily science. Most studies haue focused on
indiuiduaL coping behauior of f'amily members as the1, deal uith
stressful situations ranging from normal to catastrophic. Howeuer,
there is an increasing neecl to ttnderstand hotu /amilies cope as
groups. To date, there has not been an in-clepth discLtssionor
clarification of coping as a family-leuel construct. By reuiewing
the deuelopment of the concept of coping to its integration into
current family studles and theory building efforts, this paper
enhances clariftcation of family coping with encouragement tlnt
future research elforts be directed toward increased understanding
of this complex, multi-dimensionaLconcept.
With the increased interest in stress theory, "coping" has become a
popular concept in the family sciences. lIost studies have focused on
individual coping behavior of family members as they deal with stressful
situations ranging from normal to catastrophic. Scholars have rended to
describe how individual family members cope in or on behalf of famiiies. not
how families cope as groups or coilectiveentities. However, there is repeated
reference in the literature of rhe need to understand more about the
interactions of individual coping strr,ltegiesand their combined effects on
family relationships (e.g. Nfenaghan. 1983; Voydanoff, 1983), to integrate
individual-leveland family-level van rbles (Patterson & NlcCubbin, 1984), and
to attend to the multiple interdeperdent levels of the social system lWalker,
1985), in an attempb to understandI re processof families under stress.
Although the conceptof individu,rl coping has been addressedextensively
in psychologicalliterature and in a reeent review by Menaghan t1983), there
* Pa tricia A. H. Dy k is a PhD s t udent i n t h e F a m i l y a n d H u m a n D e v e i o p m e n t
program at Utah State University, Logan, Utah 84322. Jay D. Schvaneveldt is a
professor of Family and Human Deveioprnent at Utah State Universlty. Requests for
rep rints sh ou id be s ent t o Pat r ic ia Dy k .
The authors express apprecratlon to
Hamilton I. McCubbin and Elizabeth G. llenaghan for their consuuctive crrtiques of
an earlier draft of this articie presented at the i6th Annual Pre-conference
Workshop on Theory Construction and Research Methodology at the Natronal Council
on Family Relations Annual Nleeting,Dearborn, MI, November, 1986.
Key words: Coping, family, stress, crisis, famrly scrence.
November, 1987
FA} I I LY SCI E N C E R E V I E W
') a
Recent
of coping as a family-level concept'
has been no in-depth discussion
(R.eiss& O,liveri' 1980) and to
family-."ii"g "models
efforts to formularr'L"J"f"
(Mccubbin & Patterson'
"f family- stress
integrate family ."pi;;-i";
toward the development of a
r."v
1gg3) have begu"'*'"riiJ
.irrror-ltion to theory development, research'
i" irrrporlu"tfamilyJevel concept. s'ince it
we hope to
idea of concepts' in this paper
clear
u
and applicabion to itut"
and reviewing
family topi"g by integrating
enhance the .ru"it-"liio"- of
and theory building efforts'
"t"dies
""r**
AS A CONCEPT
DEVELOPMENT OF COPING
Third New
In everyday language' Webster's
,,to L." o. encounter and to find
defines coping as
(167i, p. sozl.
overcome probtems ;;-;iff"rlties"
u^.t to at
tru."i
in rhe family dtl'-.;;'-ll
family sociological'
fru*"*ort s--psychologicaland
Internationol Dictionary
necessary expedients to
More specifircallv,coping
least two disciplinarv
Psychological
"lu?g"rv ;n":**
tn:
*"-t^111.-
conceptions,whichui***d.opi,,gas.largelyunconsciousresponsestointernal
in shaping responses
; ttt" tJru of cognitiv-eappraisal
conflicts (Haan, ffil;
learning theorists
social
.op-i; *ffoti1.
t0 externat ,trus"o." and guidirrg
(Bandura' 1977) by
coping
of
also have contributed t0 th; "orr."pt.tutiJution
between the person and the
emphasizing the process_ofrecipro"uiint*ruction
the "active role the
nl""rrt formulalion*- h;;; empttasi"ed
environment.
p"v.trological world and in utilizing
his or t
individual pruv" ir,
",
"onstruing o,. to'--.rrJairy problematic aspects of the
resources to manage stress
_
Price and Wortman' 1985' p' 550)'
environment" 6;;;;
RecentreviewsbyHaan(1982)andMoosandBillings(1982)speaktoihe
and
*. * t'"* topi"g should be conceptualized
controversy within psychology
*tettei coping"uettavioris cross-situationally
measured. stuJi""-*ressiig
in their coping
that"peopr"-rno* lit"tle consistency
consistent trr"-*t*"
1980) or across different
oo[.r-"r, & t u".t.rs,
strategies across iii"
-ii".ii"n"
roledomainssuchascopingwithworkstressormaritaldissatisfaction
1978)'
(Pearlin& Schooler,
the extent to which people are
Another controversy focuses around
are
Presuming some coping efforts
aware of their coping efforts'
24
Num er ou
classify them i
to be no currel
dimensions of
sit,uation from
of rhe problem
three dimensx
simultaneously
Lazarus
conceprualizau
-consLently cl
erternal and,o
the resources
definitrons usei
fomi\
focus of psychotherapies' educational
Coping, though cur-rently
'h",has been important to psychology for over
programs, and muJh pop literatulg'
as the
Abstra'cts'copin! behavior is described
40 years. rr, *'"'p'i"'f,' togical
in adapting to
or
,,use of conscious o, .rrr.on."iot"
T9:!?ni*ts
't'uLgiesO1-.nds" (American Psychological
stress, various disorders, o" "rruirorr**iiL
Association,1982)'
of the
(1984) set forth a detailed description
Lazarus and Folkman
&
(Lazarus
in addition, Lazarus' work
development of the
"i* coping concept.
psvchoanalvtic
Launier, 1e?8)
unconscious. H
ass€ss lheir or
compare self-n
FAM I LY S C I E N C E R E V I E W
November, 1987
Scx'ro/r
The fam
rork of Reuh
Bur r , 1973r .
e manager of r
In the la
trgument that
lrrh
should b
as stri
&find
Lere or devr
arengrh€nrng
Gntlturul)
a!
clrnrn^ung th
Ths rau
reYFr
ct rL. 1960f-cadc
to slnoi
E
of fid
dt
trrd
tiirl
o
Jfr
;rnbr
nd
HrHt
ls,
,!ftSF .
r
l
I
*r
unconscious,Haan (1982) has criticized the assumption that people are able to
assess their own coping abilities. However, few attempts have been made to
compare self-reports with clinical observations.
Numerous coping strategies have been identified and attempts made to
classify them into conceptual domains (Moos & Billings, 1982). There appears
to be no current consensusabout a coping typology. However, lhree common
dimensions of coping responses seem to include those that: (1) modify the
situation from which the strainful experience arises; (2) control the meaning
of the problem; and (3) manage the stress (Pearlin & Schooler,(1978). These
three dimensions are not considered mutually exclusive and can be applied
simultaneouslyor sequentiallyto a given problem.
Lazarus and Folkman (1984) have formulated a definition and
conceptualization of the coping process wherein they define coping as a
"constantly changing cognitive and behavioral effort to manage specific
external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding
the resources of the person" (p. 141). This definition is very similar to
definitions used by family theorists in their studies of coping.
Family Sociologiaal
The family sociological perspective on coping stems from the classic
work of Reuben Hill (1949) and the synthesis of Hill's framework by Wesley
Burr (1973). This latter work depicts the family as a reactor to stress and as
a manager of resourceswithin the flamily system.
In the late 1970's, McCubbin (1979) presenbedevidence to supporl the
argument that coping behavior is an integral part of family resources and as
such should be incorporated into family stress iheory. Coping was broadly
defined as strategies for managing stress. He asserted that the family would
have or develop, and employ a range of coping strategies directed at
strengthening its internal organization and functioning, at procuring
community and social supports, and in some cases, at diverting, reducing or
eliminating the source of stress.
This integration of coping into stress theory was highlighted in a 1980
decade review article in the Journal of Marciage and the Family (McCubbin,
et al., 1980). The authors indicated that the interest in family coping and its
link to successful individual adjustment signaled a shift in priorities in the
study of family behavior to understand how families successfully negotiate
critical transition points. The shift from stress as a debilitating factor to a
prevalent one led to an increased interest in coping. Stress was viewed as a
normal factor of everyday life. There was a shift from questioning why
families had problems to how families dealt with stressors.
Recent studies of family coping (e.g. McCubbin, Cauble, & Patberson,
1982; Stetz, Lewis & Primono, 1986) have reemphasizedthe importance of
adaptation, maintaining family unity, and the use of social support. However,
most studies still focus on the coping of individual family members such as
November. 1987
FAM I LY SCI E N C E R E V I E W
25
(Barbarin, Hughes, &
bhe wife (Boss, Mccubbin, & Lester, 19?9) or parents
not the family as a
and
1984)
&
schinke,
Gilchrist,
chesler, 1985; schilling,
unit.
progress has been made in the clarificabion of individual coping patterns
arrd ,eceitly of coping patterns of families. However, the literature is replete
with examites ot- the variety of coping terms (i.e. coping sLrat€gies, coping
methods, coping mechanisms, coping repertoires) that are used, often
This
interchange.Uty, *itttout defining the meaning of the coping variables'
has
that'
factor
is
one
level
individual
the
at
inconsisten.y itt terminology
at
variables
of
interrelation
and
clarity
of
conceptual
contributed to the lack
of
the
bridging
and
variables
of
coping
Clarification
the family level.
ch:rllenging
and
flormidable
is
a
concepls
coping
family-level
individual and
lheory
task for family scientists, yet a necessary step for future research and
be
will
now
models
coping
family
of
development
Recent
development.
considered.
F O R M U L A T IO N
OF C OP IN G MOD E LS
Family Paradigm
Reiss and oliveri (1980) purport Lhat families develop "paradigms" or
to the
unified cognitive appraisals of bhemselves irnd cheir relation
as a
serves
in
crisis,
born
or
approach,
idea
This new
environmenl.
in
daily
problem
solving
family's
the
to
perspective
background and orienting
when:
response
life. They have defined coping as a
the family is called upon to exert unusual effort: to observe, to
of
experience, to define, to undersband, and to take some kind
of
routines
orderly
more
the
to
return
it
can
special action so that
(P
.
4 3 1 ).
dail y l i v i n g
multiple
Reiss and oliveri view family coping as a process of balancing
firmily
Lhe
of
capacities
adaptive
life
lhrough
of family
dimensions
on
studies
to
other
In
contrast
closure).
and
(configUration, coordination,
the
to
as
conclusions
no
make
researchers
these
coping strategies,
must
adaptlveness ol straiegies, but hold to the premise thai coping strategies
assumptions
and
objectives
its
own
upon
based
be employed by each family
about the environment.
Although this model views coping at the family level' we would concur
with Klein (1983) that the notion of a family paradigm is flawed in some
respects. It is presumed that all family members will function as a unit at
within
either a high or low level on each dimension. But how are variations
not
score
do
members
If
all
handled?
be
b
the family on each dimension
or a
considered,
scores
bhe
of
average
is
lhe
high, say in configuration,
individual
by
controlled
resources
family
other
wJighted average based upon
Also, can families which rate extremely low on configuration act
meibers?
Although strong as a model of the family
together to develop a paradigm?
Oliveri's (1980) model fails to
and
reicting to ibs environment, Reiss
incorporate che
im plem ent r t r on
Double ABCI
Familv sc
observed diffe
situalions. Th
ABCX family ,
, che f am ily's c
f.rmily makes o
The origrr
rnfluencing fan
br ing about cl
adirptation. \lt
a Double ABI
var iables inclu
rdentified as a
components, n
families try to
may be directc
managing the
integrity and n
and ( 5) im plem
the new dema
slressor specih
life at, che sarne
Famil; Adjusn
trIcCubbin
rnto t.he Famil
rdentifies, desc
In respons€ to
adaptive famrl
appear to be I
possible interre
I n t hr s sc
conceptual clar
coplng resourot
Delinttictn
K")' to I
consrdered .rn
\ o re rn o e r.
26
FAM I LY S C I E N C E R E V I E W
November,1987
.i
yll
incorporate the dynamics within the family structure that could affect the
implementation of coping strategies.
Double ABCX Model
Family scholars have attempted to identify variables thab account for bhe
observed differences among families in their adaptations bo stressful
situations. The earliest conceptualfoundation was Hill's well known (1949)
ABCX family crisis model where A (the stressor event), interacting with B
(the family's crisis meeting resources), interacting with C (the deFrnition the
family makes of the event), produce X (the crisis).
The original study implementing this model revealed additional factors
influencing family adaptation including family coping strategies designed lo
bring about changes in family slructure in an effort to achieve positive
adaptation. McCubbin and Patterson (1983) used Hill's formulation to advance
a Double ABCX Model of family behavior that incorporated post-crisis
Coping was
variables including the coping strategies families employ.
behavioral
includes
both
cognitive
and
identified as a bridging concepi that
interact
as
perceptions,
responses
behavioral
and
components, resources,
Family
coping
efforts
in
family
functioning.
families try to achieve a balance
may be directed at (1) eliminating and/or avoiding stressors and strains; (2)
managing the hardships of the situation; (3) maintaining the family system's
integrity and morale; (4) acquiring and developingresourcesto meet demands;
and (5) implementing structural changes in the family system to accommodate
the new demands (McCubbin, 1979). Coping was identified as not being
stressor specific, but involving efforts to manage various dimensions of family
life at the same time.
Family Adjustment and Aduptation Response(FAAR)
McCubbin and Patterson (1983) have expandedthe Double ABCX model
into the Family Adjustment and Adaptation Response (FAAR) model which
identifies, describes, and integrates the process components of family behavior
in response to a stressor and to a family crisis by including adjustment and
ad:rptive family-level coping strategies. The strengths of the FAAR model
appear to be that it considers coping as a process and shows a pattern for
possibleinterrelations of family coping variables.
FAMILY COPING AS A CONCEPT
In this section, we will present a deflrnitionof family coping and several
conceptual clarifications. These include coping as a process, coping functions,
coping resources,coping strategies and coping efTectiveness.
Definition
Key to the concept of family coping are three levels that must be
considered and integrated into a model of family coping. The first level is
November,
1987
FAM I LY SCI E N C B R E V I E W
27
Coping is viewed as the cognitive and behavioral effort made
the individual.
lo master, resolve, toierate, or reduce demands that tax or
individual
the
by
personal resources and the styies and efforts employed.
his
or
her
exceed
(1983)
thoroughly reviewed individual coping and reference is
has
Menaghan
study.
further
for
to
her
article
made
During t
issues such .
event or mrru
strategies rar
family.
The second level can be referred to as the int'ra'family level. It is at
this level that the unit of analysis shifts to subsystems within the family (i.e.
husband-wife) or the individual's relationship to the family unit (absent
father-remainder of family).
Dur ine
previous stag
to deal with :
The rhird level is that of the family level. Here, lhe unir of anal-"*sisis
It is at this level that coping aids in
the family es a whole, a group.
and famil-'" demands.
environmental
fit
belween
promoting a better
The authors suggest that the family remain the unit of anal-"*sisand that
the following dynamic conceptual definition be .rdopted: Family coping is rhe
effort of the family system to master, [olerate, or reduce demands thal tax or
exceed the family's resources and the strategies employed. Ideaily, efforts by
individual family members, subsystems, and rhe famiiy unit will be aimed at
achieving a balance in the family system thal promotes individual growth and
development (individual level), faciiitates organization and unity iin[ra'famiiy
level), and manages external andior internal demands assessed by the family
as exceeding current family resources (family level). However, it must be
recognized rhat although efforts may be aimed a[ such a baiance. individuai
growth may be sacrificed to family unity, or family uniLy expended in favor
of one or more individual's growth, or a combinarion of both where the
family unit is more disorganized and family members' individuai development is
also sbunted.
Family Coping as a Process
To define family coping as constantly changrng describes a process.
Individual family members, their relationship ro each other, and family'
environment relalionships are conslantly changing, necessitatlng reevaluation
which in Lurn influences subsequenb coping effort's. This coping process ts
continually mediated by cognitive reappraisals and behavioral efforts Lo
maintain a sense of balance in the family system.
To understand this aspect of the concepl, several dimensions of coping
must be considered: the stages of family coping with respect to 3 particular
evenq phases of coping; family coping over the life cycie; and coping rvirh
multiple stressors.
The uhree stages of famiiy coping with respect to a particuiar event are
anticipation, impact, and post-impact. Studies shedding light on this aspect
of coping have focused on specific life events such as the birth of a child
iV ent ur a a n d Bo s s , 1 9 8 3 ), p e ri o d i c a b sence of busi ness executi ve fathers l B oss
et al, 19?9 ), a n d u n e mp l o y me n t tV o y danoff, 1983).
28
FAM I LY SC I E N C E R E V I E W
N ovember, 1987
As t he
emerge focus
lo return lo :
level of ent r c:
This Pr
f at her 's ioss
r each an im c
stage of uner
wor k indivr o
har dships. er
m ay set r hr
themseives b
earning roie
which in turn
be necessarl'
The ian
Reiss and Olr
pr obiem - solv
decision. Tl
examining :
them as seqi
order. Wirhr
based upon it
Anot her
and Pattersor
of r esist ance
var ious eoac
phase r s pi- e
linearlf irrrr
way or f oilos
This eq
assum es I 3r
term, other s
in the cese
Fam ill' copr r
dramaticeill'
N ov ember, l :31
-
During the anticipation stage, the family must cognitively deal with such
issues such as: Can it be prevented? What can be done to prepare for the
event or minimize the impact? If unpreventable, can it be folerated? Coping
'strategies
ringing from'avdidance to problem-scilvingcan be employed by the
family.
During the impact stage, some of lhe thoughts and actions in the
previous stage becomemoot. In addition, new strategies must be implemented
to deai with any discrepanciesbetween anticipation and reality'
As the family moves into lhe post-impact stage, new considerslions
emerge focusedaround "Now what?" evaluations. Can or does the family rvant
[o return to the status qtto ante? These responsesin turn may lead to a nelv
level of ancicipation.
This process can be illustrated in the case of a family faced with a
father's loss of job. The anticipation stage may begin with the layoff notice.
reach an impact with the last day of work, and proceedinto the post-impact
stage of unemployment. Throughout each stage, family members will need to
work individually and together to accommodate changes in resources,
hardships, and role deflrnitions. The coping strategies employed by the family
may set the scene for further anticipation processes as the strategies
themselvesbecome sources of further stress. The assumption of lhe income
earning role by the wife could lead to feelings of resentment in either spouse
which in lurn creales new stress. Even after reemployment,adjustmentsmay
be necessaryas the new job may be less desirableor necessitarca move.
The family coping process also can be consideredin rerms of phases.
Reiss and Oliveri (f980) set forth chree phases of family coping born out of a
problem-solving framework: definition. trial action, and commi[ment to
decision. They view these phases as three conceptual vantage points for
examining a family's response to a stressful event rather than considering
them as sequentiai phases which foilow one another in regular or predictable
order. Within each of these phases, however, a family will employ straregies
basedupon its own resources.
Another perspective of family coping phases is espousedby )IcCubbin
and Patterson (1983) in the FAAR model. The authors emphasize[hree phases
of resistance, restructuring, and consoiidationduring which lamrlies empioy
various adaptive coping strategies. It is presumed that [he restructuring
phase is precededby the resistancestage. However. families may not proceed
linearly from crisis to adaptalion. A family might become stuck aiong the
way or follow a cyclical path as they work through lhe siruation.
This awareness of the cyclical nature of the coping process necessarily
assumesa processover time. Whereas some stressfui situations may be shortterm, other situations necessitatea family coping over long periods of time as
in the case of long-term illness, dual careers, or loss of famlly member.
Family coping strategies employed in year one may be the same or vary
Studies of coping
dramatically from strategies employed in year ten.
Novemb er, 19 87
FAM I LY SC I E N C E R E V I E W
29
strat€gies employed by families of prisoners (Lowenstein, l9E4) reveal the age
of children ln ttre family and the length of time since incarc'eration are
critical factors in the choice of coping strategies employed by the families.
The dynamic aspect of life-cycle characteristics contributes lo the necessity
of adapting coping strategiesto the currenl situation'
This discussionof the processualna[ure of coping heretoforehas focused
However, it is also
on the sequential nature of family coping efforts.
multiple stressors
face
necessary to consider the fact that families
For
example, whaL
at all three levels of flamily relarionships.ill child or
"or,"rrr"r,tly
with
chronically
a
coping strategies must be employed by a family
will
resources
What
with marital conflict while facing economic diffrculties?
coping
Family
crises?
a family rely upon in the midst of such multiple
must be viewed as a process of continually managing and
,r""""*.iily
attempting to balance internal and external demands'
In light of this state of continual change, families are experiencing new
demands and opportunities tha[ mus[ b€ handled on a continual basis.
However, most of our phase models assume an inirially stable family whose
normal family functioning is interrupted by some new event or stressor and,
This
after a perioi of coping, reorganizes itself in some new stable state.
on-going
the
not
address
does
upprou"h is stressoi oi situaCion specific and
pro."*. of daily adjustmenbs. A challenge for family scientists will be to
incorporate the dynamics of family interaction into their models, recognizing
not only daily changes but that families may be facing multiple stressors
coping) and co
problem (emoti
emotion-focused
been an apprau
challenging en'
more probable
change.
I t should
influence each
impede each o
research and
approaches to
approach, to t
focused, should
As noted ,
such as dual ca
Needle and W
intergeneraLion
Martin and At"
contexts are m(
perspectives. t
studying specil'
slyles may be ir
simultaneously.
Coping Resourc'
Functions of Coping
In clarifying the concepbof family coping, i[ is necessary to understand
(1980)
the purposes coping strategies serve. McCubbin and his colleagues
specified four functions of family coping as:
(1) reducingthe vulnerability of the family to the stressor;
(2) strengtheningor maintaining family system characteristics;
(3) reducingor eliminating stressorevents and their hardships; and
(4) altering the environment by changingsocialcircumstances.
Coping efforts also may be directed at eliminating or reducing demands,
redefining demands so as to make them more manageable, managing the
tension itri"tt is felt as a result of experiencingdemands, and/or increasing
resourcesfor dealing with demands (Pearlin & Schooler, 1978)' In addition t<r
increasing resources",a family may focus i|s efforts on avoiding the erosion of
individual or family ,*"o,rr"ur, so that through the coping process mat'erial
resourcesare not drained, bonds among family members are maintained, and
that the family's ability to respond to subsequent s[ressors has not been
reduced.
These efforts support the distinction between coping lhat is direcfed aC
(problem-focused
managing or alterin; the problem causing the distress
30
FAM I LY SC I E N C E R E V I E W
N ovember, 1987
Resources
and necessaril;
family unit, ar
developed and
resources thar
ranging from nr
Individu:r.l
need can rnc
analytical skill:
r eview of indivr
Fam ily sy
can include co
change its po\
response to srlu
M cCubbin, 198
pr oblem - solving
problem solvinl
resources of thr
determine che
N ov etnber, l 98l
coping) and coping that is directed at regulating emotional response to the
problem (emotion-focusedcoping) (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980). In general,
emotion-focused forms of coping are more likely to occur when there has
been an appraisal that nothing can be done to modify harmful, threatening, or
challenging environment conditions. Problem-focused forms of coping are
more probable when such conditions are appraised as being amenable to
change.
It should be noted bhat problem-focused and emotion-focused coping
influence each other throughoub a stressful encounter and can facilitate or
impede each obher. Klein (1983) has spoken of'Lhe need to integrate bhe
research and theory of stress, crisis, and coping and problem-solving
approaches to gain greaber insight into family coping variables.
This
approach, to view the functions of coping both as problem- and emotionfocused, should aid in the integration of the two bodiesof research.
As noLedabove, coping functions have been assessedin specific contexts
such as dual career families (Skinner, 1982), adolescenthealth risk (McCubbin,
Needle and Wilson, 1985), families of prisoners (Lowenstein, 1984), and
intergenerational transfer of the family farm (Russel, Griffin, Flinchbough,
Martin and Atilano, 1985). Coping behaviors and strategies within specific
cont€xts are more situation speciFrcthan those derived from larger theoretical
perspectives. As we gain greater insight into the functions coping serves by
studying specific family life events, however, broader trans-situational coping
styles may be induced,thus enhancingtheory-buildingefforts.
Coping Resources
Resources are part of a family's capabilities Lo meet or reduce demands
and necessarily include existing characteristics of individual members, the
family unit, and the community as well as expanded resources that are
developed and strengthened in response to stressor demands. It is these
resources that a family draws upon to meet the demands of life events
ranging from normal to catastrophic.
Individual coping resourceswhich the family may rely upon in times of
need can include characleristics such as self-esteem. intellectual and
analytical skills, and interpersonal and other social skills. For a thorough
review of individual coping resourcesconsult Menaghan (1983).
Family system resources,or Lhe internal attributes of the family unib,
can include cohesion (emotional bonding), adaptability (family's ability to
change its power structure, role relationships, and relationship rules in
response to situational and developmentalstress), and communication (Olson &
McCubbin, 1982). Klein and Hill (1979) emphasized that homogeneity of
problem-solving competenciesand the extent to which particular and over-all
problem solving skills are evenly distributed among family members are
resources of the family. Additionally, the financial resources of a family will
determine the options available to a family to obtain services in the
Novernber. 1987
FAM I LY SCI E N C E R E V I E W
QI
mitigation of the stress. Hoimstrom (1972) reported that dual-carCr coupies
were quite willing [o use money to resolveoverioadsLrain.
Recent studies have been directed at the identification of, famlly-level
Patterson and \icCubbin 198{ ' have noted the
interpersonal skills.
resource of androgl'n1- 'gender onent:riion
psychoiogicai
impoirance of the
and high femirune auributes'3s trI1
masculine
high
characterized by both
use of e broader oopl4g repertoire'
and
intervening factor in rhe development
femrlies in lsrael. I owenstein
prisoner's
of
patterns
In his stuJy of the coping
in the familyresource
key
a
as
labor
(1984) identifieddivision of
Community resourcesor social support c:rn include p€opleor instltutlons
rvrlich
that fhe famiiy can lurn to in rimes of need or a support rpr*'ork :n
Sociei
1933'.
Parks&
Piiisuk
love,-r
and
valued,
for,
the flamily is cared
to
l'3t2'
et
Cauble.
lately
research
'rl"
-\lcCubbin.
support has elicited much
s-\'stems'
femrllestended
upon
rel.v*
families
deiermine the extent that
community support groups, church, and other social networks dunng times of
StTESS.
Identification of key famiiy coping resources is the Frrst step in
process'
understanding rhe function of such resources in the coping
the
rn
buffering
role
their
towards
directed
Attention has recently been
the
of
rec'ent
stucilther
[n
(Whearon,
1985r.
impact of social stressors
fami
iy
that
found
P
atterson'
l
9E
5r
a
nd
Double A B CX mo d e l , L a v e e , N l c C u b b i n ,
lffect
communrcationr
supportive
and
(cohesion,
adaptability,
system resources
role in
aiaptation directly whiie social support appeared to have a bulTelng
reducing post-crisis strain.
variables to
Research directed at integrabing individual and famrll'-level
But ..;ust as
to
dat€.
limited
been
has
resources
determine a family's coping
to
adaotatron
famrll"s
to
a
critical
be
to
found
was
the B factor, resources,
coping
famrll"s
a
of
understandir:g
further
(Hill,
1949), so too shouid
crisis
resources lead to further insight into the coping process'
Coping Strategies
we now
Assuming that, coping resources has been suffrcientl;- dedt rvith.
strateg]-.
coping
of
concepl
rhe
of
-\lthough
shift to conceptual claiification
rr i s
t he t er m c op i n g s tra te g y a p p e a rs i n nearl y al l l i terature on copi ng.
or
rndivrdual
an
b1'
taken
approach
the
inciudes
meaning
seldom defined. Its
to
:r
I'
esponse
i
n
ect
or
end
u
nderstend.
d
e
fi
n
e
.
f am ily t o obs e rv e . e x p e ri e n c e .
strategy
tr
stressor.
the
of
nature
the
on
Depending
chalienging experience.
m ay be em plo y e d i n th e s h o rt re rm o r may necessi tate i mpl ement.rtton over a
refer
long period of time. Coping s[rategles are often used s1'nony'mousiv ro
the
authors
literature'
family
the
in
For
clariry
actions.
to iont"*t-specific
would suggest that the term coping strateg-Y be used to refer to the specific
made by a famiiy. eirher cognrtiveiy or behavioraily, to
rypes of i".por,.".
demands.
Two recent lines of research have shed light on family coping strategies.
a9
FAM I LY SCI EN C E R E V I E W
November, 1987
McCubbin, L.rr
which identifv
social suppor:.
and accept heir
employed bv
corresponding :
report five e,jo
in their studv r
distribution ri
m em ber si. F, adm inisr lar ion
members to iJ.d
To dar e.
context- relareri
within the fa:r:r
analysis. Hov
underlying i;r:
sysrcm are :n:
underslooci in :,
interdependent
pr oblem s nece. :
Due to :he
t he coping st v.
family in a r1'l
Folkm an , l9Sl
of the copine i
coping st1'les or
in em ploying 'r
em ploys m ukr c
different recurr
strategies .]re
styles. These
studies of fr.mr
in a con[ ext uai
Coping ETfectuTmn l i n i t
:n
depends on : he
famiiy's resourt he im pact of r r
The chor c
in copine efec:
inherentlv g,:'t
ineffectrve rri :
extent to rvhrch
McCubbin, Larsen, and Olson (1982) have developedtheir F'COPES Scales
which identify five coping strategies: reframing, passive appraisal, acquiring
social support, seeking spiritual support, and mobilizing the family to acquire
and accept help. Stetz, et al., (1986), from their study of coping slrategies
employed by families with a chronicaily ill mother, identified srraLegies
correspondingto the five assessedin the F-COPES. They also, however.
report five additional strategies. The predominanf coping stralegy identified
in their study was alterations in househoidmanagement (coordinationof roles,
distribution of aid between famiiy members, and effirmation of family
members). Four other internal householdfamily coping slrategies included:
administrarion of sanctions, discretionary non-action. mobilizing family
members to take aclion. and reducinginvoivemenrin acriviries.
To date, research on family coping strategies has been focused on
context-reiatedevenrs and lhe coping abilities of individuals and subsystems
within rhe family. Ferv studies have identified the torai family as the unit of
analysis. However, if one is to take a sys[ems approach (the paradigm
underlying family therapy) with the premise that the elements wirhin the
system are interdependent,then an individuai family member can only be
understoodin the family conteKt tNlinuchin, 1985). Hence, if the individuai is
interdependentwith other family members, individual problems becomefamily
problemsnecessiuating
the invoivementof the encire family unit.
Due to the sparsity of longitudinal studies, we have much to learn about
the coping styles families empioy - rhat is, the strategies employed by the
family in a typical. habitual manner in approachingproblems. Lazarus and
Folkman (1984) suggest rhab complexity and flexibility are two formal aspects
of the coping process lo be consideredas dimensions on which to examine
coping styles over many encounlers. Hence,does a family have a simple styie
in employing only one strategy or does it have a complex style in lha6 it
employs multiple strategies? And/or, does a family tailor its strategies at
different recurrencesof the same event (flexibility)? Perhaps family coping
strategies are so flexible and compiex Lo preciude the ciassification inlo
styles. These questions can only be answered by the results of longrtudinal
studies of family coping strategies in differenr crisis situations over time or
in a contextualmodel as advocatedby Walker (1985).
Coping Effectiueness
Implicit in family coping is the notion of effectiveness. Effective coping
depends on the relationships between the demands of the situation and a
family's resourcesand on the family's appraisai and coping efforts to resoive
the impact of the demands.
The choiceof coping strategy has been identified as an important factor
in coping effectiveness(Pearlin & Schooler, 1978). Coping strategies are no[
A s[rateg:y effective in one situarion can be
inherenrly good or bad.
ineffective in another. The effectivenessof the stralegy depends on the
extenl to which it is appropriate[o the situation'sdemands.
No ve mbe r, 1 987
FAM I LY SC I E N C E R E V I E W
DO
Effectiveness cannot be based solely on the implementation of coping
strategies. Even though coping is normally vier+'ed :fs 3 s€t of constructive
efforts designed to protect the famiiy. there mav be seconciarl' efTects or
costs of coping. As Cohen. Evans, Stokols and Krantz ,l9i{ir mte. rhere ma1drarn co€nitive
be a cumuiative fatigue effect u'hen conrinual coptng cftrtr
energies. There also may be an overgeneralization of a o;ing strategl' rvhen
In
sltustions.
the strategy continues to be emplol*ed even rn inapprogure
r*'hich *'ere
addition, coping side effecrs may occur r,r'hen coprng bcberbrs
successful in amelioratine rhe effects of the stressor arc &*rrmental rn other
ways.
A recent srudy by NlcCubbin and his .tssocratsi .1965' of :,dolescent
ailture of even
health risk behaviors pointed to rhe porcntralll' dysfictinal
constructive and wellness-promoting coping strategreg
-ldohscents' use of
ventilation iexpressing' frustration. 1'elling. comPLaidqg to other iemiiy
members) rvas positively correlared in their use oi cigareues. eicohoi. and
drugs. Thus rhese strategies employ'ed b1' the adolsccots ma1' be effeclive
from their perspec[ive but the rest of the family rrll probabll' view the
a sLressor for the
substance use as an ineffecbive strategy rvhrch becog
family as a whole.
In the problem-solving literature, the key depencient variable is
"problem-solving effectiveness" rvhich is the ability of the famrll' to soive it's
pr oblem s ef fe c ri v e l y (Kl e i n a n d H i l l , 1979). K l etn rl 983t suggests a new
dependent variable in studies of family coping m4hc be labeled "coping
effectiveness" with cautions that the processua-l nature of coprng should not
and ag:ng are all
Loss of life. "acLs of fu'.
be equated with mastery.
normal life situations which cannol be overcome in a problem-solving
Effective coping under these difficulties is that whrch allows a
framework.
family lo endure, accept, or ignore wha! cannot be changed.
A workable approach lo the assessment of famill' coping efTectiveness
may lie in the differentiation between functronal and d:;sfunctional methods
by which families cope. Figiey (1983) sets forth rhe follos'rng ll universal
charac[eristics of such differentiation:
1"
2.
3.
1.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Q,,1
Ability to identify the stressor;
Viewing the situation as a family problem, rather lhan
m e re l y a p ro b i e m o f o n e o r t w o of i ts members:
A d o p ti n g a s o l u l i o n -o ri e n ted approach to the probl em.
rather than simply blaming;
Showing toierance for other famiiy members:
Clear expression of commitment to and affeclton for
other famiiy members:
O p e n a n d c l e a r c o mmu n i c a ti on among members:
Evidence of high family cohesron;
Evidence of considerable role flexibiliry:
Appropriate utilizacion of resources insrde and outside
the family;
FAM I LY SCIE \ C E R E V I E \ !
\ovember,
10.
11.
Lack c
Lack c
Further studies
characteristics :
processof copin
Additionel
effectivenessci
members. -\n
strategy, base,l
family's resour.
of a family's coo
What t hen
m ast er , r esoive.
resources ano :i
by cognitive rea
multidimension.r
t hr ough phases.
Family' cor
problem-focused
determined in o
and social suppo
Effective c
situation and e
between these :
insight into a ier
Famill- me
of an int er act lr
problem-focusec
in response to :r
The ma-ro
issue-specific .
analysis. Thr s :
critical purDose
strategles. ;1nc
elements necess
group.
As rve leer
we will be bet t e
family member,
1987
N ov ember. l 93i
10.
11.
Lack of overt or covert physical violence;and
Lack of substanceabuse1p. 18)'
Further studies of famiiy coping should assesslhe interrelationshipsof these
characteristics and [heir contribution to rhe flamily's coping straregies and
processof coping.
Additionally, studies should evaluate the family's perception of the
effectivenessof the coping surategiesemployed both by the group and by its
members. An objective measure of the appropriateness of the employed
strateg:y, based upon the fltt between the demands on the family and the
familyls resources.could lead to a greater understandingof the effectiveness
of a family's copingstretegies.
SUMIVTARY
What chen is family coping? It is the effort of the family system to
master, resolve, tolerate, or reduce demands that tax or exceed the family's
resourcesand the strategies employed. It is a processcontinuall-"-mediated
by cognitive reappraisals and behavioral effort to balance stressors. Coping is
of various stages of events,
muitiJimensional and necessitatesthe emplo-v-ment
time.
through phases.end over
Family coping serves multiple functions, bub of particuiar import are
problem-focusedand emorion-focusedcoping. The way a family copes is
determined in part by its resources which include individuai, family system,
and socialsuPPortresources.
Effective coping depends on the relarionships among the demands of a
gap
situation and a family's resources and the family's efforts to bridge any
yield
should
effectiveness
coping
of
clarificacion
berween these two. Further
insight inco a family's coping styles.
Family members respond to slressors not only as individuals but as part
of an interactive network. Coordination of family members' emotion- and
probiem-focused effort is required if the entire family is to cope effectively
in responselo lhe stressor.
The majority of family-related coping studies have used situation- or
issue-specific approaches and focused on the individual as the unit of
anaiysis. This may appear narrow and iimiting, but this researchhas served a
criticai purpose in Jefining role palterns, common coping resources and
strategies, and emphasizing the processualnature of coping. These are ail
eiements necessary to further lhe understanding of the family's coping as a
group.
As we learn more about rhe coping of individuals and famiiy subgroups,
we will be beLter pr.eparedto sel up empiricai studies to tesi the dynamics of
family members rvithin the group and the effect that' has on the famiiy as a
No ve mbe r, 19 87
FA}IILY SCIENCE REVIEW
35
level, research is called
whole reacting with the environment. At the family
to families, such as their
for which demonstrates that lhe properties ascribed
the environmeni' are emergen[
degree of integration or orientation towards
properties of the group.
A s weg a i n g re a te ri n s i g h ti n to fa m i l ycopi ngresources,hopeful l y
families emplo-"- wiil assist
additional insights rlgarding the coping strategies
of
ind the family itself. Just as recent srudies
therapists, policy
adoles c entc o p i n g S-u'kur.
tra te g i e s (} tc C u b b i netel ' 1985)havereveal edthat
level rather than rhrough
intervention may be mo.! benefici:,rl al the famiiy
dr ugpr ogr a m s ' 5 0 s h o u l d | u rth e rs tu d i e s offami l ;-strategi esprovi de
heiping famiiies cope'
ir1ro"r*utio" as to the most bene{jcial approach to
as perceived by tl-re
Although most studies have focused on family coping
coping .,vithin families.
parents, recen[ studies have focused on adolescent
irs to lhe contribution ot
However, to date, there appears to be little research
as rhe focus of the
younger chiidren to rhe coping process' other than
et al .. 1984: chi l d w i th cancer
s r r es s or ev e n t !i .e . d i s a b l e d .rti l a u v S chi l l i ng
by B ar bar in e [ a l ., 1 9 8 5 ).
indexes thar requit e
studies of parental coping have utilized coping
strategies- they have employed
adults to complete inrrentoiies of coping
1981)' W hac
( Nlc Cubbin , B o s s , Wi l s o n , a n d D a h l , 1979: S ki nner & }IcC ubbi n,
a famtiy's
to
conlribution
measures can be developed to assess a child's
Is a child's coping ability an
coplng resources and strategies implemented?
are they merely carried by the
essential factor in a family's coping ability or
of importance to
since adolescent coping has been shown to be
iu_nv no*t
child's coping ebility affect the
a family,s coping ability, a[ whaL point does a
What roie does the famiiy play in teaching the chiid
flamily,s coping
"niiityi
These are key questions that will need lo be
effective coping strategiesl
addressed in future family studies'
of determining ke1' coprng
Since families are ever-changing, the prospect
To date, srudies have indicated
resources and styles seems quirc ro.midabie.
r hat c oping Stra te g i e s a p p e a rto b e s i tu ati onspeci fi c.Inasearchfor
impos-sible to study every
understandlng of fimily-level coping, it appears
s it uat iona fa m i l y -u y fu " " So a S to h a v e s p eci fi ci nformati ontoassi sta
We must continue [o search for
family in response [o each stressor'
to further assist famiiies'
commonalities in coping resources and strategies
E v en mo re i m p o rta n l th a n i d e n ti fyi nguni versal orcommonsequencesof
about rvhether some coplng
coping, however, is rrre need for information
given types of families, for given
stracegies are more effective rhan others in
given conditions'
types of stress. at certain times' and under
REFERENCES
index
of psychological
Association.(1982). Thesq.urus
AmericanPsychological
terms,tiird. edition lVashingtonD'C': Author'
JO
FAM I LY S C I E N C E R E V I E W
November, 1987
Bandura, A. '
Hall.
Barbarin. O.. I
funcrionl
and the F
Boss, P.. \IcC
wife's co
Famil P'
Burr, W. R.
Nerv Yor
Cohen,S.. Er:
enu iro nrtn,
Figley, C. R.
NIcCubbu
Catastro
Folkman. S..
aged con
2 19-239
Haan, N. li
orgonuc
Haan, N. l3
Goldber
clinical c
Hill, R. t.l9{9
Holmstrom. L
Kessler, R..
psychop
Rosenrv
572t. P:
Klein, D. \1.
NIcCub
the f'amt
Kiein, D. \1.
effectrve
Contem
The Fre
N ov ember, l 9S l
Bandura, A. (1977). Sociallearning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Hall.
Prentice
Barbarin, o., Hughes, D., and chesler, M. (1985). stress, coping and marital
functioning among parents of children with cancer. Journal of Marriage
and the FamilY,17,473'180.
Boss, P., McCubbin, H. I., and Lester, G. (i979). The corporateexecutive
wife's coping patterns in response to routine husband-father absence.
Family Process,18, 79-86'
Burr, W. R. (1973). Theory constructionand the sociologyof' the famil-v.
New York: WileY.
Cohen,S., Evans, G., Stokois,D., and Krlniz, D. i1986). Behauior,heaLthand
enuironmentalstress.New York: Pienum Press'
Figley, c. R. (1983). coping wirh cauastrophe. In C. R. Figiey and H. I.
Coping tuith
McCubbin (Eds.), Srress and the family (Vol. II):
Thomas'
(pp.
G'
IL:
Charles
3'20). Springfield,
Catastrophe
Folkman. S., and Lazarus, R. S' (1980). An anaiysis of coping in a middleaged community sample" Journal of Health and sociaL Behauior, 21,
219-239.
Haan, N. (.1977). Coping and defending: Processesof self-enuironmentaL
organization New York: AcademicPress'
Haan, N. (1982). The assessmentof coping, defense,and stress' In L.
Goldbergerand S. BrezniLz(Eds.), Hqndbooh of stress: Theoreticalond
clinical aspects(pp.254-269). New York: The Free Press'
Hill, R. (1949). Families under sfress. New York: Harper & Row'
Holmsbrom, L. (1972). The two careerfamily. Cambridge: Schenkman.
(
Social factors in
Kessler, R., Price. R., and Wortman, C. 1985).
process' In NI'
coping
and
support
psychoparhology:slress' social
(Eds.),
tpp.531'
psychoLogy
of
reuiew
Annual
Rosenweigand L. Porter
Inc.
Reviews,
572). PaIo Alto, CA: Annual
Klein, D. NI. (1983). Famiiy problem solving and family stress' In H. I.
NlcCubbin.lvl. B. Sussman. and J. lI. Patterson (Eds'), Social stressand
thefamily (pp. 85-112). New York: The Hayworth Press' Inc'
Klein, D. X{. and Hiil, R' (1979). Determinants of family problem soiving
effecriveness. In W. Burr, R. HiiI, F. Ny", and I. Reiss (Eds.l,
Contemporarytheoriesabout the family tVol 1) tpp.'193-5'18t.New York:
The Free Press'
No ve mbe r, 19 87
FAM I LY SC I E N C E R E V I E W
1,7
J' M' (1985)' The double ABCX
Lavee, Y., NfcCubbin,H' I', and Patterson'
empirical test by anaiysis of
model of family *,",., and adaptation: an
and the
with latent variables. Journal of tr[arriage
structurai
"qt,*tio,,.
FamilY,47, 8LL'825'
Moos, R. H.. B
resources
Handbooh
York The
(1984)' Sfress' appraisal' and coping' New
Lazarus, R. S. and Folkman, S'
York: SPringer'
Olson, D. H.. r
famill' s1
l
InH.i.
Stress.Cit
C. Thorne
Lazarus,R.S.endLaunier,R.(1978)'stress.reiated|ransactionsbelrveen
In L' A' Pervin and rv'I' Lewis tEds')'
person and .,,"i'onrn""t'
'Perspectiue
psychology' New York: Plenum'
in interactionaL
the case of prisoners' wives'
Lowens[ein. A. ( 1984). Coping with stress:
699'708'
Journal of Matiage and the FamiLy''46'
and Dahl' B' (1979)' Family coping
NlcCubbin,H. [., Boss, P'' Wilson' L''
Nlinnesota'
inuentory.St. Paul, )[N: University of
Patterson. 'J.:
Journci t'
Pearlin. L.. :.r
HeoLthcn"
McCubbin,H.I.,Cauble,A.E.,andPatterson.J.NI.(Eds.).(1982).Family
Thomas'
support' Springfield' IL: Charies C'
stress,coping,and socicll
Pilisuk, \I. :n,j
I. \lcCuob
the f'an:i
reseorc.i,
E'' Comeau'J' K" Patterson'J' lI''
McCubbin,H. I., Joy, C' B', Cauble' A'
andNeedle,R.H-11980)'Familystressandcoping:adecadereview'
855-87I'
Journal of Marriage and the Famib;' 42 '
Reiss, D. ano t
proposai
response
D' H' (1982)' Family coping
McCubbin, H. I., Larsen, A' S' antl Olson'
and D' H' Olson (Eds')
Larsen'
sLrategies. In H' I' McCubbi'r' A' S'
University of
St' Paul' MN:
Famity inu",io,:t"l (pp" 101-:20)'
Minnesota,FamilY SocialScience'
McCubbin,H.I.,Needle,R'H',andWilson'M'(1985)'Adolescenthealthrisk
FamiLl,
and adolescentcoping as critical factors.
behaviors:r"*irv.''*ss
Relations,34, 5L'62'
(1983). The famiiy stress,procu.=.=''-h:
McCubbin,H. I. and Pallerson,J. M.
doubleABCXmodelofadjustmenbandadap|ation.InH.I.NlcCubbin'NI.
(Eds.), Social stressand the family tpp.
B. Sussman. and J. M. Patterson
Inc'
Press'
7'38). New York: The Hayworth
}Ienaghan,E.(1983).Individuaicopingeffortandfamrlystudies:conceptual
NI'
rn n. i NIcCubbin,,"vI.B. Sussman and J.
and merhod"ilgi.uiirr""r.
York:
(pp' 113-136)' New
PattersontEds.), Socialstressand the family
The HaYworth Press' Inc'
Minuchin,P.(1985).Familiesandindividualdevelopment:provocationsfrom
56' 289'302'
the field of famity therapy' Chitd Deuetopment'
aq
FAM I LY SC I E N C E R E V I E W
N ovember, I987
Russel,C.. Gr
Copingst
farm. Ru
Schilling, R. F.
suppor!
Relations
Skinner. D. l1
H. I. \IC
sfress,-'c
C. Thorn
Stetz, K. \1.. I
ano cnro
Ventura. J. \
parents \
875.
Voydanoff. P
\IcC ubc:
(pp. to--
N ov ember, l 3S l
Moos, R. H., Billings, A. G. (1982). Conceptualizingand measuring coping
resources and processes. In L. Goldberger and S. Breznitz (Eds.),
Handbooh of stress: theoreticol and clinical aspects (pp. 212-230). New
York The Free Press.
Olson, D. H., and NlcCubbin,H. I. (1982). Circumplexmodel of marital and
family systems, V: application to family slress and crisis intervenlion.
In H. i. llcCubbin, A. E. Cauble, and J. NI. Patterson (.Eds.),Family
Stress.Coping, and Socia.lSupport, (pp. a8-68). Springfield, IL: Charles
C. Thomas.
Patterson, J. \I. and McCubbin, H. I. il98'l). Gender roles and coping.
Journal of lIarriage and the FamiLy.46, 95- 104.
Pearlin, L., and Schooler,C. (1978). The structure of coping. Jou,rnal of
Healthand SocialBehauior,19,2-21.
Pilisuk, NI. and Parks, S. H. f1981). Socialsupport and family stress. In H.
I. McCubbin,M. B. Sussman,and J. II. Patterson (Eds.),Social stressand
the family: Aduances and deuelopments in family stress theory and
(pp. 137-156). New York: Haworth.
research,
Reiss, D. and Oliveri, M. E. (1980). Family paradigm and family coping: a
proposal for linking the family's intrinsic adaptive capacities io its
responses
m stress. Family Relattons,29,131-444.
Russel,C., Griffin, C., Flinchbaugh,C. Martin, M., and Atilano, R. (1985).
Coping strategiesassociatedwith intergenerationaltransfer of rhe family
50, 361'376.
farm. Rural SocioLogy,
Schilling,R.F., Gilchrist,L. D., and Schinke,S. P. (1984). Copingand social
Family
support in families of developmentally disabled children.
Relations,33, 3I7 -327.
Skinner, D. (1982). Stressorsand coping patt€rns of dual-careerfamilies. In
H. I. McCubbin, A. E. McCauble, and J. \{. Patterson (Eds.)' Family
stress,coping,and socialsupport (pp. i36-150)" Springfield, IL: Charies
C. Thomas.
Stetz. K. N{., Lewis, F. NI., and Primono, J. (1986). Family coping strat'egies
35, 515'522.
and chronicillnessin the mother. Family ReLations,
Ventura, J. N. and Boss, P. (1983). The family coping inventory applied to
parents with new babies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 15. 867'
875.
Voydanoll, p. i1983). Coping trith unemp\oyment. \n C. R. Sig\ey and \1. \.
N,tcCubbin1Eds.),Siress and the lamily (Vol. II): Coping uith catastrophe
(pp. 90-102). Springfield.IL: CharlesG' Thomas.
Novemb er, 1 987
FANTILYSCIENCE REVIEW
eo
family stress' Journal oi llsr?iage and
Walker, A. (1985). Reconceptualizing
the FamilY, 47, 827-837'
Spe
Fa
Webster,sThirdNewlnternationalDictionaryoftheEnglishl.anguage.
(1971). Springfield' rv-IS:G & C Nlerriam'
functrons 'rf coping
wheaton, B. ( 1985). Nlodels for the srress'buffering
352'36-t'
26'
resources. Journal of Heolth and Science'
Disttnc!
m ade.
sr r 6st cr
unsub . r
t aou. I
Fam ii. ', .
nor m : r
time.
Major t
on famill- :
Never t heless
bounds of :'e
A varietl' ,,i
as to rvhllt l!
t he discussio
say t hat r he
view might n
Whr le r
of r esear ch.
ones in par:
particular l:r
which the l
thai such an
explanat ions
suppor t t her r
M ainst r
researcher c
and, if used :
* Er i k Fr l sr n
prot'essor oi I
Te m p e ..\r r zcr
Ke y w o r d s: Sp
.t0
FAI VI iLY SC I E N C E R E V I E W
\ovember,
1987