Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Coping strategies for working women : aerobic exercise and relaxation interventions Haney, Colleen Judith 1986

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1987_A7_5 H36_3.pdf [ 4.71MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0077232.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0077232-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0077232-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0077232-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0077232-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0077232-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0077232-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0077232-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0077232.ris

Full Text

COPING STRATEGIES FOR WORKING WOMEN: AEROBIC RELAXATION  EXERCISE  INTERVENTIONS  COLLEEN JUDITH HANEY  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT  OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE School of P h y s i c a l  We  accept to  this  Education  thesis  the r e q u i r e d  STUDIES and R e c r e a t i o n  as conforming standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA December  ©  1986  COLLEEN JUDITH HANEY,  1986  AND  In  presenting  requirements  this  Columbia,  freely  available  permission  scholarly  I agree for  or  understood  that  partial  that  the  reference  may  by  his copying  gain..shall  not  be or  fulfilment  Library  of P h y s i c a l  granted  this  by  the  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  allowed  D a t e : December  1986  it  of It  for my is  of t h i s t h e s i s f o r  without  and R e c r e a t i o n  Columbia  Head  of  agree  thesis  representatives.  or p u b l i c a t i o n  Education  the  make  I further  of  permission.  School  shall  and s t u d y .  her  be  of  d e g r e e a t t h e The U n i v e r s i t y  f o r extensive copying  purposes  Department  financial  in  f o r an a d v a n c e d  British  that  thesis  my  written  ii  ABSTRACT This  study  examined  stress-management progressive increases  the  effects  interventions  strategies  self-efficacy,  for  sedentary  working  that  aerobic  treatment,  would  be a s e f f e c t i v e  a  in trait  anxiety, of  women.  coping  It  was  relatively  new  o r more e f f e c t i v e  than  exercise,  relaxation, a well  8-week  e x e r c i s e and  and enhancement  expected  progressive  two  (aerobic  r e l a x a t i o n ) on r e d u c t i o n s in  of  a  researched  treatment,  as  stress-management i n t e r v e n t i o n . The  39.8)  subjects  solicited  newspaper  were from  .72 the  advertisement  females  aged  Vancouver  asking  community  f o r stressed  to p a r t i c i p a t e i n two*stress-management were  interviewed  and  exercise  or  treatment  sessions  with  subjects  week.  Prior  to  and  1984).  Subjects  and  a t 8-week  a  over  for  first  Checklist  7-Day E x e r c i s e were a s s e s s e d  follow-up.  aerobic The  a n 8-week  period  1  1/2  Scale  hours  subjects &  (Sherer  (Lazarus  6  R e c a l l Inventory again  They  treatment.  session  Seif-Efficacy  volunteers  t o an  (Spielberger, Gorsuch,  1 9 8 2 ) , Ways o f C o p i n g 1984),  i n groups  the  STAI-T  the General  relaxation  (M = via  programs.  assigned  were c o n d u c t e d  meeting  administered: 1970),  randomly  progressive  24-59,  at  per were  Lushene, et a l . , Folkman, (Blair,  posttreatment  iii  Repeated variance  with preplanned  treatment anxiety  measures,  groups and  follow-up.  addition,  the t o t a l  the  difference  between  emotion-focused  Additionally, scores  follow-up perceived  discussed.  coping  t h e r e was  response  self-efficacy  and  pre-  a t 8-week  indicated  as w e l l  did  not  as  change  posttreatment.  relationship and  to  problem-focused  to  a negative  to  ancillary  questionnaires, by  strategies,  pre-  trait  multivariate  measures  strategies,  both  high  between  scores  in  coping.  the  stress-management results  repeated  t h e number o f  from  in  emotion-focused In  from  one-way  number o f c o p i n g  significantly  low  a  of  that  in decreasing  self-efficacy  variance with  that  and  effective  These c h a n g e s were m a i n t a i n e d  In of  analysis  contrasts, indicated  increasing  posttreatment.  analysis  were  multivariate  aerobic  participants treatment.  suggestions  posttreatment exercise  as a more  future  was  satisfactory  Implications for  and  of  studies  these are  Table  of Contents  ABSTRACT  i i  L I S T OF TABLES  v i i  L I S T OF FIGURES  viii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  ix  INTRODUCTION  1  REVIEW  9  OF LITERATURE  Theories/Models of Coping.. Functions  9  of Coping  Measurement  10  of Coping  Gender D i f f e r e n c e s  20  i n Coping  Stress-Management Treatment  ;  Packages  23 25  Exercise  26  Progressive  Relaxation  Self-Efficacy  31  Theory  34  Adherence  39  Summary  39  METHOD  41  Subjects  41  Design  42  and Procedures  Measures Trait  44 Anxiety  General  44  Self-Ef ficacy  Scale  45  Ways o f C o p i n g C h e c k l i s t 7-Day R e c a l l Manipulation Ancillary  .  45 •  46  Check  48  Measures  48  V  Treatments  49  Leaders  .  50  E x e r c i s e Walk/Jog Program  50  Progressive  51  Relaxation  Program  RESULTS  53  Group C o m p a r a b i l i t y - D e s c r i p t i v e S t a t i s t i c s  53  Chi-Square Analysis  53  Subject  54  Attrition  MANOVA for Pretreatment  54  S e l f - e f f icacy-STAI  54  Coping-Exercise  56  M a n i p u l a t i o n Check  56  Treatment E f f e c t s MANOVA for S e l f - e f f i c a c y - T r a i t  57 Anxiety  57  MANOVA for Coping  59  Self-efficacy  61  as a P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e  A n c i l l a r y Measures  61  MANOVA for E x e r c i s e  61  Post and F o l l o w - u p Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s  62  C o r r e l a t i o n Matrix  64  DISCUSSION.  66  REFERENCES.  74  APPENDIX A  89  Telephone  Screening  90  Interview  91  Informed Consent  93  APPENDIX B  9  4  vi Tension Par  Thermometer  95  Q  96  APPENDIX C  97  Examples o f P e r c e i v e d  Stressors  APPENDIX D General  99 Self-Efficacy  Scale  APPENDIX E Factor Revised  98  100 101  A n a l y s i s and R e l i a b i l i t y Form o f C o p i n g C h e c k l i s t  APPENDIX F  102 104 105  7-Day R e c a l l  106  O c c u p a t i o n s and P r o f e s s i o n s . . . . . .  107  Ancillary  Measures  Expectancy Questionnaire.....  ^.108 115  vii  List  I.  Summary  of Subject  II.  Means and S t a n d a r d  of  Tables  Characteristics  Deviations  43  of Outcome  Measures  .  III.  55  Means and S t a n d a r d  Deviations  of  Expectancy  Scores  IV.  Summary for  V.  58  of M u l t i v a r i a t e and U n i v a r i a t e  Results  Outcome M e a s u r e s  Correlation Matrix Other  Selected  of Dependent  Factors  60  V a r i a b l e s and 65  List  Pre,  P o s t and  Exercise  of  Figures  F o l l o w - u p G r o u p Means f o r  Composite  Score  (minutes X  intensity).  ix  Acknowledgements I and  feel  greatly  my  thesis  encouragement  i n d e b t e d t o my committee  friends,  for  and u n d e r s t a n d i n g  my  their  throughout  family support,  my  thesis  project. I  would  like  supervisor, with  Dr.  but  research.  express  B o n i t a Long  the inspiration  thesis  and  helped  me  I needed h e r .  who  develop  throughout  appreciation  my  my  complete  me my  "fco p u r s u e  provided a d v i c e , and  thesis  From D r .  to  an eagerness  Long  to  not only provided  motivation  A s my m e n t o r , D r .  understanding when  to  a n d was a l w a y s  Long  I have  learned  there many  things. I  would  like  t o thank  valuable  feedback  available  when  Finally, his time  support from  Washington  Dr.  on s t a t i s t i c a l  I needed I would  busy  t o a t t e n d my  Schutz  matters  for his  and f o r being  assistance. like  t o thank  a n d c o m m e n t s o n my his  R.  schedule thesis  thesis at  Dr.  F.  and the  Smoll f o r for  taking  University  proposal and  defence.  of  1  Introduct ion Women's p a r t i c i p a t i o n than  doubled  i n the past  concentrated stress.  on  how  stress  interventions  as  workforce  cope  with  been l i m i t e d a  result  despite  the  interventions  (Woolfolk  Unfortunately,  coping  of  &  Lazarus  Jaremko, study  1983). was  Folkman,  Therefore,  to  compare  "outcome" the primary the  focused rather  upon than  studies  the the  which  Rosenman's  as  effectiveness  strategy  include  Baum, are  to correlate &  Singer,  evaluated  situations  call  with 1984).  along  a  (i.e.,  general  traits  (1974) Type A b e h a v i o r Trait coping  studies  disposition, Examples  of  a r e F r i e d m a n and  and  Bryne's  measures  (Fleming,  trait  dimension,  f o r a wide r a n g e o f c o p i n g  (1964)  a r e seldom  strategies  In most c a s e s , single  women, and  conceptualized coping  employed).  coping  of  a s an outcome.  process  individual's  repression-sensitization. found  a  &  purpose of t h i s  strategies  investigators  been  (Meichenbaum  i n coping  r a t h e r than  emotional  1984) have s e l d o m  to  as a t r a i t  1984).  reduce  i n t e r v e n t i o n s f o r working  Traditionally,  such  techniques  stress-management examine c h a n g e s  of  (i.e.,  responses,  intervention  stress-management  Lehrer,  use t o s o l v e problems or  a s an  work-related  proliferation  individuals  studied  more  f o c u s on how women  strategies  &  has  30 y e a r s , y e t few s t u d i e s have  women  There has a l s o  cope w i t h  i n the  measures but  many  strategies  2  (Moos  &  Billings,  must d e a l w i t h hospital  1982).  several  situation,  multiple  situations  all  the  of  by a s i n g l e  are  beginning  Lazarus,  sources and  dimensional to  1985; P a r k e s ,  considers  These  two  with  Emotion-focused  two coping  and  one a n o t h e r  (Lazarus  coping  likely  t o be u s e d  is  coping  incorporate  subjects,  Evidence  1978).  Folkman  In a and  coping: coping.  & Folkman, to  occur  1984).  when t h e  that nothing  are  & Moos, Although  can  be  coping i s  are a p p r a i s e d as  related  to  some  researchers (e.g.,  forms o f c o p i n g  and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d study  Lazarus  of  more  1981; F i n n , 1985;  dimensions  c o p i n g ) , most  problem-focused  model  i s a c c r u i n g t h a t t h e use  coping  as b a s i c components.  &  s e p a r a t e l y or i n  situations  (Billings  other  appraisal-focused  such  strategies  & Schooler,  identify  when  a  of  i t , whereas p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  problem-focused  Pearlin  Folkman  emotion-focused function  t o change.  effective  accounted  researchers  1984;  dimensions  can  change  of  Thus,  Hammen,  basic  done  possible  c o p e s c a n be  the  whether  (1980) have d e v e l o p e d  h a s been a p p r a i s e d  more l i k e l y  doubtful  measure.  &  situation to  is  of  1984).  strategies  conjunction  Because  the  examine t h e d i v e r s e r a n g e o f c o p i n g  (Astor-Dubin  problem-focused  stress--pain,  visitors.  involved, i t  Folkman and L a z a r u s which  of  ways an i n d i v i d u a l  for  strategies  F o r example, an i l l p e r s o n  100  (1980) f o u n d  scales coping  middle-aged that  both  3  problem-focused all  subjects.  both be  and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d R e s u l t s from  emotion-focused  evaluated  when  these  c o p i n g were u s e d by  studies  suggest  and problem-focused  measuring  an  coping  that should  individual's  coping  strategies. While gender 1984;  some  researchers  differences Billings  Pearlin  &  in  & Moos,  examined  Folkman  Lazarus  and  problem-focused were coping  strategies  Maiuro,  and  found males and  Schooler  individuals Effective coping rather related  few  studies  have  found  t h a n women  in  Russo,  (1985)  examined  patients, and  spouses  medical  of c o p i n g  a  that  more  men  three  in  This  recent s p e c i f i c on  women  more a c t i v e  make  and  more  mode  diverse with  educated of c o p i n g .  coping  of  on e n d u r i n g  encounters.  Astor-Dubin  than  Pearlin  repertoire  focused  more  Carr,  scores  strategies.  stressful  depression,  types of  of p a t i e n t s  higher  effective  study  that  s t u d e n t s ) and a l s o  had s i g n i f i c a n t l y number  more  situations  Vitaliano,  used  that  men u s e d  more o f t e n .  (1978) f o u n d  study  women.  both  strategies. than  in  that  c o p i n g was d e f i n e d a s a v a r i e d  (1984) f o u n d engage  1980;  women used  females  for total  Lazarus,  responses  (1980)  disease,  for  &  that  (psychiatric  that  1978),  but  evidence  ( A s t o r - D u b i n & Hammen,  coping  Becker  Alizheimer's  found  1981; Folkman  coping  unchangeable  samples  coping  Schooler,  specifically  have  In a  a n d Hammen responses,  a n d b e h a v i o r a l c o p i n g , a n d seek  4  others  out,  However, not  while  in their  controlled.  coping  behaviors  assumed  men  use  more  cognitive  study  the  nature  Since  the  above s t u d i e s have  in s p e c i f i c  that coping  of t h e  contexts,  behaviors  will  coping.  stressor  it  was  examined  cannot  g e n e r a l i z e to  be  other  situations. In by  summary,  treating  defining  v a r i a b l e s as coping  stressful  differences. on  there  as  events,  methodology,  focus  r e s e a r c h on  using  1980)  Ways  of  as w e l l as  (Billings  thought promising  of  and  Vitaliano  intervention,  Evidence  activity,  particularly  important  role  in  is  stress  and  Lazarus,  stress  as  systematic  more  recently,  Lehrer,  1984).  activity,  treatment  may  and A  has  (e.g.,  that  exercise  reduction  have  inoculation  accumulating aerobic  time  to  dimensions  with  stress  physical  been u s e d as a s t r e s s - m a n a g e m e n t  gender  e t a l . , 1985).  and  &  and  instruments  coping  relaxation, as  over  Folkman &  such  such  single  beginning  test  for coping  (Woolfolk  1984).  of  techniques,  techniques, stopping  utilized  the  on  consider  Checklist,  treatments  behavioral  desensitization cognitive  1981;  unidirectional,  s t u d i e s are  development  hampered  measurements  to  of c o p i n g  revisions  been  focusing  inadequate  Coping  & Moos,  Traditional involved  trait,  However, c u r r e n t  strategies  has  were  failing  is continuing  (e.g.,  i f they a  and  coping  also Long,  physical play  an  ( f o r reviews  see  5  Eide,  1982;  Mihevic, and  1982).  and  aerobic  refer  5  days  Medicine,  anxiety  most  60% 60  of  From as  minutes at  anxiety  psychological  (i.e., perform  important an  reduced a n x i e t y of  a  1981;  study and 10-week  Long  aerobic  These c h a n g e s were m a i n t a i n e d  at  of  3  exercise  reductions  in  populations. samples &  to  Beutler,  Hilyer  &  1976). that  processes  functioning,  improved  that  behavior),  a  for  intervention example,  that  self-efficacy exercise  can  reduced  account  For  found  one and  may  1984).  (1984)  increased  rate,  aerobic  1972;  that  Long,  exercise  Sports  e f f e c t i v e stress-management  & Holmes,  controlled  outcomes  For  of  Chambless,  belief  coping  this  frequency  their  i t appears  the a  in  heart  College  Gardner,  better  as  (Jasnoski  &  reviewed,  are  exercise  (Doyne,  Lynch,  exercise,  non-clinical  studies  successfully  a  r e l a t e d to  Young & I s m a i l ,  self-efficacy  maximum  limited  1980;  activities.  P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an  studies  1979;  aerobic  interchangeably  (American  individuals  Mitchell,  result  to  Ledwidge,  i n d i v i d u a l s should  shown t o be  Folkins,  1981;  muscle  i n b o t h c l i n i c a l and  sedentary  such  15  1980).  However,  1983;  gross  week  been  used  to occur  of  per  p r o g r a m has  are  i n t e n s i t y of  a duration  to  Sime,  terms e x e r c i s e ,  to  benefits  a minimum  for  a  The  &  physical activity  paper  at  Folkins  in  subjects as  the  intervention.  15-month  follow-up.  6  A study women  by J a s n o s k i  after  training  they  participated  program.  functioning  I t was f o u n d  (more  self-assurance  and  reliably  associated  fitness,  and  independent Jasnoski, whether  and Holmes  with of  (1981) a s s e s s e d 103  in that  better  emotional less  a 15-week  higher  levels in  with  They  improved  scores  jogging,  compared some  found  and  that  an  Furthermore, assessed  change.  independent  participation  These  t o c o n t r o l groups.  Thus,  f o r exercise  stress-management  general  class  control  per  on s e l f - p e r c e i v e d a b i l i t i e s  a n d (b) i m p r o v e d  support  viable  program  f i t n e s s o r m e r e l y p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an  controls  group.  to  the  compared women i n a 10-week e x e r c i s e  waitlist  was  aerobic  (1981)  endurance program mediates p s y c h o l o g i c a l researchers  of  in / f i t n e s s .  Holmes, Solomon, and A g u i a r physical  more  tenseness)  participation changes  personality  stability,  reported  with  aerobic  se  (a)  in relation  self-confidence,  there  appears t o  be  p a r t i c i p a t i o n p e r se as a  intervention  for  sedentary  individuals. While evidence accumulates of  exercise  behavior  for mental h e a l t h ,  h a s been p r o b l e m a t i c  A  growing  of  people  body o f r e s e a r c h who b e g i n  often  within  the  Martin  & Dubbert,  t o support  the b e n e f i t s  maintenance of e x e r c i s e  (Martin suggests  an  exercise  first  few  & Dubbert, that  program  months  1982; Ward & Morgan,  1985).  the majority will  stop,  (Dishman, 1982; 1984).  One  of  7  the p s y c h o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s positively enactive  with  program  self-efficacy Atkins,  expend  people  and  areas  cessation  long they  as  such  comparison  determine they  i n the  change comes  as h e a l t h b e h a v i o r ,  & Stuart, Wilson  two  f o r example  smoking  1981), and  obesity  1984).  (1978)  treatment  when t h e  treatment  i s known t o be  anxiety,  1980;  propose  packages  that  is  Lehrer,  &  McCann,  progressive  in  variety  w h i c h t o compare  of  Borkovec,  an  similar, Since  & Lehrer,  was  aerobic  used  commitment a  as  exercise  when  one  Progressive have and  been state  the a b i l i t y  to  (Cangelosi,  Wood, 1978; in  clinical  and  1984)  populations  1982),  the  considered  trait  increasing  1983;  Rooney,  relaxation  are  reducing  mood, and  &  accommodate  effective.  (Woolfolk  effective  changing  Heidi  to  treatments  programs  f o r a wide  f a c e of  of b e h a v i o r  problem,  shown t o be  will  a predictor  f o r outcome r e s e a r c h when t h e p r i m a r y  Relaxation  what  supporting  and of  Kaplan,  Evidence  to d i s c o v e r a treatment  relax  persist  is  self-efficacy  much e f f o r t  will  an  1977).  (Mitchell  Kazdin  1981;  to  (Condiotte & L i c h t e n s t e i n ,  treatments  adherence to  self-efficacy i n , how  correlate  smoking t r e a t m e n t )  According  of  (Bandura,  self-efficacy  is  1984).  engage  how  adversity  walking,  of  to  (Condiotte & Lichtenstein,  expectations  activities  viable  probability  (i.e.,  & Reinsch,  theory,  from  the  found  Woolfolk,  this a standard program  study with as  a  8  stress-management program  was  efficient, used  intervention.  used  easy  similar  because  to administer, programs  An i t  aerobic  was  time  and o t h e r  (Jasnoski  walk/jog and  cost  studies  have  e t a l . , 1981; L o n g ,  1984). The the  main  objective  effects  of  of t h i s  two  8-week  interventions  (progressive  exercise)  sedentary  for  t h a t an 8-week  be  or  more  in significantly  increasing  self-efficacy.  hypothesized their  that  coping  relaxation  both  exercise  strategies  emotion-focused  s t r a t e g i e s would  the  interventions.  that  p a r t i c i p a n t s with  after  the e x e r c i s e  frequency lower  of jogging  greater  trait  a n x i e t y , and  g r o u p s would more  t h e same  i t was of  in self-efficacy.  follow-up  than  and after  hypothesized self-efficacy  i n t e r v e n t i o n s , would show a at  was  increase  increase  remain  levels  i t  specifically,  would  Furthermore,  was  progressive  addition,  and,  problem-focused  It  than  In  aerobic  i n t e r v e n t i o n would  reducing  treatment  strategies  and  women.  effective  relaxation  was t o examine  stress-management  working  hypothesized equally  study  greater  participants  9  Review o f L i t e r a t u r e Coping most  with  part  chronic  poorly  stressful  understood  traditional  trait-oriented  (Folkman  Lazarus,  &  Lazarus' coping  may  1980).  f o r the  be  formulations  due  of  Therefore,  t o examine c o p i n g  of r e s e a r c h  measurement addition, such  and  is  to  coping  Folkman and  (1980) p r o c e s s - o r i e n t e d t r a n s a c t i o n a l model o f i s used  review  events  and  i n the area  processes.  of c o p i n g ,  Through a  the i s s u e s of  gender d i f f e r e n c e s a r e d i s c u s s e d .  support  for  stress-management  In  interventions  as a e r o b i c e x e r c i s e and p r o g r e s s i v e r e l a x a t i o n i s  provided. which  Furthermore,  are considered  persistence reviewed  of  Theories/Models Although theories  of  explore  the  adapting  of  behavior  plays  stressful  1977),  conceptualizations  and  psychoanalytic  theory  and  thoughts  p r o b l e m s and differentiates  is  coping  theoretical  flexible  (Bandura,  a central  research  specific  (Valliant,  the i n i t i a t i o n 1977)  and are  programs.  Coping  coping  to  both  expectations  t o stress-management  stress,  traditional theory  to affect  coping  in relation  self-efficacy  just  processes  life  in current  beginning people  to  use i n  circumstances.  A  p e r s p e c t i v e , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c ego has  contributed  measures  coping  therefore  role  and  is  reduce  of  defined  acts  to  current  coping. as  intended  stress.  among a number o f p r o c e s s e s  In  realistic to  This that  solve theory people  10  use ego are  to handle  person-environment  processes  are  defensive  (oriented  c o g n i t i v e mechanisms whose  (reality  toward  Lazarus  model the  dynamic,  is  and  efforts  and/or  internal  the  resources  specific actions  Functions  of  coping  also  been  that  the  are  v i e w e d as  being  in a  manage  bidirectional  and  specific  in  and  with  cognitive  as  external exceeding  individual. the  The  context  therefore  actually  to  t h i n k s and  changes  in  of  concerned does  thoughts  in a and  unfolds.  Lazarus  overriding  the  to  (E-focused).  in  relationship,  problem  (P-focused),  response  The  Coping  two  altering  to  coping.  the  encounter  According serves  to  person  context, an  of  alternative  i s d e f i n e d as c h a n g i n g  of  the  as  an  a  process-oriented  process-oriented  what  focused  developed  demands t h a t a r e a p p r a i s e d  person-environment  with  functions  emotion  reciprocal,  Coping  is  as  environment  relationship.  coping,  coping  mutually  behavioral  and  (1984)  formulations  transactional and  Folkman  model of  psychoanalytic  person  distorting)  These  tension reduction). and  transactional  relationships.  the  and  and  functions: causing (b)  identified  major by  (a)  (1984)  managing  the  or  emotional  emotion-focused f u n c t i o n s of c o p i n g  Moos  coping  stress--problem-focused  regulating  problem--  T h e s e two  Folkman  and  Billings  coping have (1982),  11  Felton  and  Revenson  (1978) i n t h e i r  It  is  that  nothing  Folkman,  coping  selective  used  includes  when the  situation  has  can  done  change  be  to  In a d d i t i o n ,  maintain  hope and  the  processes  lend themselves  may  (Lazarus,  described  being  dichotomized  as  self-deception  can  stage  of  the  to  have when  cope  incapacitation  to  struggle  terms  with  t o cope  P-focused  the  problem.  of  rather For  than  example,  consequences  if  as  which  diabetes  exercise.  a  Alternately, early  person's  resources  are  way  a  by  believing  as  as  i t seems).  reality  severe later of  will  the  the  and  manner.  the a l t e r n a t i v e s , coping  person  situation  include generating  P-focused  (i.e.,  for a while  i n a more P - f o c u s e d  to the problem, weighing on  such  that only  strategies  E-focused  v a l u e a t an  not  the  to  S e l f - d e c e p t i o n i s best  i n a more P - f o c u s e d  (1985) s u g g e s t s  an  a positive a  is  helps  interpretation  or h e a l t h y .  and  &  to refuse  result,  to s e r i o u s  to d i e t  and  such  (Lazarus  coping  continuum  illness  can  a  t o an  a  cord p a t i e n t i s helped  Lazarus come  an  coping  insufficient spinal  lead  attention  self-deception  As  1985).  on  it  as  thinking.  been a p p r a i s e d  optimism  pathogenic  ignores  requires  Schooler  such  wishful  E-focused  worst.  self-deception as  and  strategies  and  acknowledge  person  Pearlin  attention,  1984).  individual  and  research.  E-focused avoidance,  (1984),  solutions  and  acting  is typically  used  1 2  when  situations  and  are  empirical  strategies (Billings 1985;  research  are  provide  & Moos,  1981; &  to  some s u p p o r t  Felton  F o r example,  are  stressed  (Finn,  Stress  s t u d i e s has  of  Stressful  Dohrenwend, depression  1974),  (1962).  However,  P-focused  coping  E-focused  coping.  tend  to  episode  194  (E-focused) (P-focused) associated recent asking  and to with  stressful how  they  more on P - f o c u s e d  than  revised  &  Scale  from  should  not  (Dohrenwend symptoms  work be  more  other  by  effective both  situations i n almost  that more deal less event,  they d e a l t  (1981) f o u n d fewer reliance  every  with  a  stress. then  with the event.  they coping  study  attempts  event  Respondents responded  than  behaviors  active  stressful  that  1986).  in a survey  on  and  forms of and  avoidance  &  Langner  assumed  earlier,  stressful  Moos  P-focused that  L a z a r u s , Gruen, & DeLongis,  and  families  self-report  psychosomatic  each  of  problems  been measured by a  always  i n most  following  1985).  As m e n t i o n e d  facilitate  Billings of  it  Finn,  Moos,  adapted  is  (Folkman,  1984;  The  Holahan  Events  and  questions  c o p i n g are used  1985;  Life  coping  methodological  rely  E-focused coping  form  1978).  individuals  when t h e y  P-focused  effective  & Revenson,  without  t o change,  that  f o r the e f f e c t i v e n e s s  coping.  in these  more  Schooler,  a l t h o u g h not  less  suggests  related  Pearlin  studies,  a p p r a i s e d as p o s s i b l e  to  were  indicated 19  a  items  Interestingly,  \ 1 3  illness  events  elicited  more P - f o c u s e d  most o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s ( i . e . , This  is  contrary  (1980) i n an aged  45  to  to  65.  study  These  favored E-focused  favored  P-focused  month. used  events  A  that  68-item  to i n d i c a t e  stressful  addition,  had  As  and  E-focused  coping  most  frequent  P-focused weakness of  a  c o p i n g was i n both  binary  intensity answer  point on  studies  response  format  yes/no.  self-report,  Also,  specific  stressful  different  occasions.  identified  the  stressful  types  events  about  was i n the  work  was  coping. a  while  mix  In of  E-focused episodes,  i n these episodes.  One  appears  use  which  t o be  fails  the  individual  to  Moos' s t u d y  was  the and  data c o l l e c t e d and  Lazarus' (1,332)  Therefore,  while  responses Folkman  and  the  t o show  episodes  of  only  above,  and  forces  w h i l e Folkman  used  elicited  Billings  correlational  i n time  used  and  study  (WCC)  health-related  of t h e  of a s t r a t e g y  contexts  in this  of P - f o c u s e d  coping in  health  d u r i n g the p r e v i o u s  mentioned  also  work  Checklist  stresses  P-focused  residents  that  of c o p i n g t h e y  levels  family-related  was  occured  which types  with higher  community  Lazarus  a t 4-week i n t e r v a l s  Ways o f C o p i n g  situation.  associated  100  Participants  times  children).  Folkman and  coping while  coping.  were i n t e r v i e w e d seven  of  by  r e s e a r c h e r s found  contexts  stressful  work, home, and  findings  empirical  c o p i n g than d i d  made  at  a  single  study  focused  on  seven  both  studies  to  various  Lazarus'  study  1 4  measured  the  frequency  Pearlin people study  and  between  (conflicts, the  (1978)  t h e a g e s of  18 and  to:  (a)  and  anxiety.  from  areas  the  occupation.  you  The  was  while having coping  a  with  specifically,  while  helpful in  more  with  by  t h e most e f f e c t i v e One general  Also,  of  nature  of  role  rather  subjects  dealt  with  to which  they  strains home  worried,  was  and "With  tense)  in coping  of g o a l s  for More,  controlled with m a r i t a l  comparisons  & Moos,  stresses  stressors. and  In  was  most  addition,  (identified  1981)  do of  favorable  parental strains.  as  seemed t o  be  coping.  p o s s i b l e problem with  the d a y - t o - d a y  their  way  strains  q u e s t i o n was,  self-reliance  Billings  asked  life  they  parental  the work a r e a m a n i p u l a t i o n coping  which  work-related  positive  their  that manipulation  for  effective  making  in coping  P-focused  on  found  for  parenting,  (bothered,  and  2,300  identified  repertoire  marital  Data  extent  role-related  varied  reflectiveness strains  marriage,  effective  they  how  the  r e s e a r c h e r s found  more  65.  potential  identify  j o b how  time.  interviewed  Participants  of  your  feel?"  goals  (b)  over  interview  identify  A typical  to  an  (c) e x p r e s s  experienced  regard  through  threats),  strains,  responses  Schooler  were c o l l e c t e d  participants  of  t h e above s t u d y  was  the  the q u e s t i o n s which tended  to  feelings  regarding  than  a  were a s k e d  of  the  individuals  specific how  they  stressful usually  focus  event.  coped  with  1 5  general in  sources  specific  were  of s t r e s s  situations.  compared  were  status  men.  generalize studies  from  differently but  the  are  also  In  this  from  additional  seeking  coping  by F e l t o n  was  o f 151  from  found  chronic  to  their  have  salubrious  on  illness.  how t h e i n d i v i d u a l  encounter, coped.  subjects  Asking  information disposition happened  Using  of the b e h a v i o r s  chronic  this  since  and  effects were  with a  were  asked  than  linked  (Folkman  in  relation  &  to  focusing  specific  stressful  how t h e y " g e n e r a l l y " may  tend  individual's finding  i s a poor  on  how f r e q u e n t l y t h e y  listed  coped  older  information  However, r a t h e r t h a n  an  there  WCC  provide  of P-focused  fantasies the  question  about rather  (1984)  illness,  1980) s u b j e c t s were a s k e d each  cope  socio-economic  middle-aged  adjustment.  used  lower  f o r the e f f e c t i v e n e s s  to  had  not o n l y  & L a z a r u s , 1980)  Revenson  while w i s h - f u l f i l l i n g  Lazarus,  socio-economic  r e p e r t o i r e s due t o t h e i r  adjustment poorer  men  1981).  and  In a study  suffering  from  & Moos,  support  strategies.  and  i t i s d i f f i c u l t to  (Folkman  individuals  (Billings  lower  individuals  across situations  Findings  women  coped  t o o t h e r p o p u l a t i o n s because  that  s t a t u s may have l i m i t e d  adults  a  Therefore,  study  finding  that  situation  addition,  actually  on o c c u p a t i o n a l c o p i n g , y e t , a l l o f t h e  women i n t h e s t u d y than  n o t how t h e y  out  to  solicit  personality what  correlation  actually with  what  1 6  people  s a y t h e y do and what t h e y a c t u a l l y  Lazarus, In  an  the  with  dealt  10 commonly  Generalizibility  In  strategies Thus,  and O l s o n  of  spouse-abuse  this  study  the study  to assess coping  women  only  use  likely  to  stresses.  d e v e l o p e d by  (1982) t o r e c o r d how t h e y  cited  addition,  when  the coping  their  F-Copes s c a l e  stressors.  is  b a t t e r e d women who u t i l i z e d  of events  battered  or resolve  a 29-item  Larsen,  shelter.  situations.  circumstances  McCubbin,  lower-class  coping  compared  passive coping  by b a t t e r e d women were l e a s t  S u b j e c t s completed  with  subjects,  p o p u l a t i o n , used  stressful  used  o f b a t t e r e d women (n =  abused  to problem-solving  their  range  study  that  g e n e r a l female  strategies alter  exploratory  (1985) f o u n d  as o p p o s e d dealing  &  1980).  56), F i n n to  do (Folkman  a  limited  spouse-abuse  f o c u s e d on a  limited  strategies.  E-focused  to  Perhaps  coping  in  home  situations. Patterson (n  =  82)  and McCubbin  faced  with  the  (military)  s e p a r a t i o n from  when  used  they  reflected In  a  (1984) r e p o r t e d t h a t stressor  their  balanced  a h i g h usage o f b o t h  addition,  the  better  P- and E - f o c u s e d  coping.  non-stressed  acceptance  lifestyle  and  effective  copers  that  husbands c o p e d  which  higher  suggests  term  strategy  significantly of  long  coping  than  of  wives  the  women stressed  optimism. use  scored women  This  a wide  on  study  range o f  17  P-focused  how  and  E-focused  The  former  an  individual  broadly  work, m a r r i a g e , study  exam) and  throughout  the  three  anticipation stage a f t e r (c)  after  &  subjects  stages  stage  both  P-focused  1980)  and  stressful  encounter  an  individual  studied  exam,  (b)  copes  were  facilitate  encounter  may  self-blame  may 1984).  to  of t h e  while  of  subjects  coping used  coping  how  stages.  at  used each  most o f t e n  E-focused  E-focused  WCC  record  coping  most o f t e n a t the w a i t i n g and  and  stage  was  used  posted.  raises  example, emphazing  97%  stage,  of P-  study  that  the  waiting  form  used  c o p i n g was  a combination  (a)  the  57-item  was  students  were p o s t e d ,  P-focused  used  the grades  A  108 exam:  forms of  was  Folkman,  (i.e.,  following  E-focused  anticipatory  may  roles  of t h e above s t r e s s f u l  found  at  coping  explored  The  midterm  were p o s t e d .  However,  This  a  b e f o r e the  stage.  after  finance).  (1985) of  Lazarus,  researchers  and  have  life  t h e exam b e f o r e t h e g r a d e s  The  (distancing)  major  d e s c r i b e s how  r e a c t e d i n each  the  in  specific  Lazarus  grades  (Folkman  a  studies  encounter.  Folkman and during  copes  on  strategies.  focused  p a r e n t i n g and  focuses  (midterm  coping  i s s u e s c o n c e r n i n g how or  impede P - f o c u s e d  the p o s i t i v e facilitate  impede  P-focused  Although  coping.  a s p e c t s of a P-focused  For  stressful  coping  coping  Folkman and  E-focused  while  (Lazarus  Lazarus'  &  (1985)  18  study  examines  a stressful  difficult  to  stressful  contexts  the  generalize  their  because  of  as  i t unfolds, i t i s  findings the  Gruen's  Lazarus,  specific  and  couples  E-focused  were  encounter  d u r i n g the  the  same  stressful was  asked  51-item  the assessment  adds  other  nature  WCC  to past  They  over  a  identify week and  (Folkman  DeLongis,  further  coping.  once a month  Subjects  revised  Dunkel-Schetter,  (1986) r e c e n t a r t i c l e  P-focused  married  of  interviewed  6-month  & Lazarus,  1985).  intraindividually  person  with  himself  encounters).  Findings  differentially  related  outcomes  or  to for  c h a r a c t e r i z e d by  of  coping)  that  depending  on  individual  had  combinations were  what  i s at  for of  P-focused  problem-solving  conjunction strategy often  than  al.  For  with  for  a  coping  example,  and  higher  involving  forms of c o p i n g .  and  levels vary  what o p t i o n s  coping  the  specific  E-focused  individuals  (P-focused)  5  coping  strategies  on  of  situations  Interestingly,  self-control  encounters  other  coping  s t a k e and  coping.  identified.  planful  and  over  that  work  outcome was  a  (comparing  satisfactory  satisfactory P-focused  on  Part  herself  indicated  (i.e.,  stressful  to respond  done  75  period.  t h e most then  and  information  was  unsatisfactory  et  to  situation. Folkman,  on  event  coping used  a  strategy in  (E-focused)  coping  a g o a l a t work more Furthermore,  (1986b) s p e c u l a t e t h a t e m o t i o n a l  Folkman  self-control  19  may  facilitate  situation  problem-solving especially  and  strategies  that  can  seemingly  facilitate  i n t h e work  contradictory  each  other  coping  i n many c o p i n g  situations. In coping  summary, were  stressful coping  Finn,  by  incident,  on  t o be  E-focused  to  situations  be  health-related  coping  may  generalizations a stressful  1984).  coping  those  & Moos,  more  relevant  & Lazarus,  role  while  (Folkman However,  studies  others  1980;  P-focused  situations. as some  1981; coping  by E - f o c u s e d c o p i n g  stressful  who  in work-related  Interestingly,  identify  identify  a  of Coping  one  of  According  of the to  how  an i n d i v i d u a l  major  must be s a t i s f i e d  process:  (a)  a  examined,  (b) what t h e p e r s o n  the encounter  specific  problems  Folkman  three c r i t e r i a  in  P-focused  P-focused  seems  (Folkman  every  incident.  assessment  s t r e s s poses research.  or  more  than  frequently  1978).  stressful  Measurement The  more  are confounded  event  used  E-focused  almost  (Billings  stressors  in  who  and  in  stressed  coping  be f a c i l i t a t e d  a l . , 1986b)  specific  less  while E-focused  & Schooler,  et  a l l subjects  & Folkman,  used  Pearlin  P-focused  individuals  1985; L a z a r u s  appears  for  used  appeared  relied  although  copes in  and L a z a r u s  t o study coping  stressful actually  encounter did  or  with  current (1985), as  a  must be thought  must be d e s c r i b e d , and ( c ) c o n t i n u o u s  20  assessments  must  be  examine c h a n g e s o v e r One  of  the  a  statements  that  most  Researchers  inventory  creating  classify about  Vitaliano  a l .  as  who  P-focused  (1985)  analyzed  t h e WCC and have f o u n d  may  stressors  subscale.  be  due  (Folkman  the  of  this  the  broader coping.  and L a z a r u s do  (1980)  something while  i t as  social  Some r e s e a r c h e r s have different  to using d i f f e r e n t  & Lazarus,  to  on a s u b s c a l e  categorizes  on  t o 68  difficult  could  to  with  E-focused  Folkman  someone  dealing  sometimes  support  which  a  are  and respond  within  and  example,  problem"  et  to  individual  variations  subcategories  "talked to  the  of  used  P-focused  For  encounter  i n v e n t o r i e s , WCC an  event  ways  have  findings  interpret.  requires  describe  of  the  used  stressful  event.  Consequently,  widely  1980)  recent  strategies  during  time.  (Folkman & L a z a r u s , summarize  made  factor  subcategories  p o p u l a t i o n s and  1985; V i t a l i a n o  et  a l . ,  1985). A n o t h e r measurement coping the  behavior.  assumption  situations few  use  studies  relatively with  that  (Folkman  consistency. are  Some  have  issue concerns  consistency  i n v e s t i g a t o r s have  coping  is  & Lazarus,  examined  Stone and Neale  To d a t e  across only a  cross-situational  (1984) r e p o r t t h a t  c o n s i s t e n t i n the coping  t h e same p r o b l e m  questioned  consistent  1980).  of  on d i f f e r e n t  people  strategies occasions.  they In  21  their  study  60  married  couples  q u e s t i o n n a i r e over 21 days. most  stressful  s c a l e of  1 to  contrast,  event  of  100 how  a  The s u b j e c t s  by  the  Folkman  than s t a b l e  stages.  event It  (i.e.,  appears  people cope with an event as i t an  isolated  event,  of  situations  those people who s h i f t cope  more  specific  event  summary,  measure  time.  It  would  have  that coping was more  a test)  over  three  that by examining how r a t h e r than  information  Studying  would  coping  over  from  one  than  strategy  to  as be a  another  those people who r e l y on  standard way to assess coping has Some s t u d i e s i d e n t i f y a  illness)  and  measure coping g e n e r a l l y ,  identify a specific the  stressful  individual's  stressful  event but do  coping s t r a t e g i e s over  seems that to measure coping e f f e c t i v e l y  or i l l n e s s ) ,  events.  a  been found. (i.e.,  which  (1985)  would a l s o help c l a r i f y whether  effectively  while others not  In  s t r a t e g i e s for most problems.  In not yet  Lazarus  unfolds  valuable  provided about c o n s i s t e n c y . variety  was.  when l o o k i n g at how an i n d i v i d u a l  copes with a s p e c i f i c different  d e s c r i b e d the  event  and  supports t h e i r o r i g i n a l hypothesis variable  a coping  the day and then r a t e d on a  stressful  study  completed  to focus on a p a r t i c u l a r area (work, home, then i s o l a t e  strategies  are  specific  i n c i d e n t s and assess  used to d e a l with the  Perhaps, then a p a t t e r n w i l l  individuals  one  do  have coping p a t t e r n s .  emerge,  stressful if  indeed  Coping research  22  to  date  seems  to  be  trying  variables  i n t o o many d i f f e r e n t  focusing  on a s p e c i f i c  the  strategies  area  an  to  encompass t o o many  situations  (i.e.,  rather  than  work) and m e a s u r i n g  individual  uses  across  work-situations. Gender D i f f e r e n c e s In are  addition  finding  Lazarus  their had  i n a study  found  women,  requiring  t o measurement p r o b l e m s ,  gender d i f f e r e n c e s  (1980),  residents, than  i n Coping.  that  but  acceptance.  use  of  at  support  because coping,  men  Pearlin  findings in  their  t h e y were more  However,  commonly  occupation-related  and  also  study  used  effective cited  stressors  while  To  cited  general  women.  sources  c o p i n g would  women  similar  of  (1978) that  P-focused  than  women.  and  were  marital  Furthermore, how  they  stress  the  usually  n o t how t h e y  situations.  examine  work-related from  by  P- a n d  f o r men  parenting  in specific  properly  more  in  women  suggest  copers  i n t h e s t u d y were a s k e d  coped  situations  and S c h o o l e r ' s  respondents  actually  in  coping  Interestingly,  were  with  P-focused and  stressors  coped  community  h i g h e r s c o r e s t h a n men on b o t h  these  the  work  and  Women and men d i d n o t d i f f e r  E-focused coping scales. study  more  E-focused coping.  significantly  Folkman  o f 100 m i d d l e - a g e d  men used  only  i n coping.  researchers  gender  require  jobs.  differences  a sample of  men  Menaghan a n d M e r v e s  in and  (1984)  23  suggest  that  female  gender  adaptive coping e f f o r t s . drawn  from  1106  Participants  were  occupational  stress  inadequate major action,  (b)  situation  the  expectations  (i.e.,  Findings  indicated  associated  with  use  (i.e., in more  likely  (d)  that  source  were:  of  The  (a)  direct  (comparing  one's  on  positive  conscious  focus  employed).  p e e r s ) , (c) s e l e c t i v e  on  work  restriction monetary  optimistic  reduction in stress  of  awards).  comparison  over  time  for  However, men were more  of e x p e c t a t i o n s r a t h e r  was both  likely to  than  selective  men r e p o r t e d more w o r k - r e l a t e d  depersonalization  t h a n men t o  use  with reduced  stress.  coping e f f o r t s Results  were a s k e d general  only  was  o v e r l o a d ) p r o b l e m s t h a n women b u t d i d n o t d i f f e r  experienced  women.  to  study  depersonalization,  comparison or  less  environment).  identified  Additionally,  associated that  noxious  past  females.  restriction  ignoring.  and  with  (517  regarding  workload,  (focusing and  and  residents  (i.e.,  optimistic  situations),  males  for their  interviewed  factors  to  inattention  Data  city  benefits,  coping  i s not a s s o c i a t e d  negotiation,  be  Women were a  strategy  was no e v i d e n c e  effects  f o r men  and  m i s l e a d i n g as p a r t i c i p a n t s  how  they  handled  rather  than  how  situations.  There  had d i f f e r e n t  could  a t work.  they  sources dealt  of with  stress  in  specific  24  Stone  and  responses days.  of  60  married  event  stressful  event  used  would  or  studied  c o u p l e s over  women  prefer that  small  of  the  to  the  coping  a period  o f 21  describe  the  day o r an a n t i c i p a t e d  and t o i n d i c a t e use f o r e a c h  men p r e f e r  noted  (1984)  The s u b j e c t s were a s k e d  stressful  that  Neale  which c o p i n g  event.  E-focused coping.  future  style  Results  instrumental (P-focused)  most  they  indicated  coping  However,  while  i t s h o u l d be  t h e magnitude of t h e c o p i n g d i f f e r e n c e s  and  statistical  in this  s t u d y may  have been due t o t h e l a r g e  number o f p r o b l e m s  analyzed  (over  coping  2,000  weakness  f o r each  i n the study  anticipate  how  utilized  both  men  mostly  stressful college  measure a n d  cognitive  life  questionnaire  if  as  which  such  (n  listing  different  = at  least  summary, from  Lazarus,  1980;  Schooler,  1978; S t o n e  the s t u d i e s  Menaghan  &  & Neale,  little  that  women while  for dealing  with  were  who  stressed  completed  one s t r e s s f u l  c o p i n g p a t t e r n s would over  be  strategies  Subjects 170)  could  gives  found  strategies  encounters.  Another  d i d cope.  (1984)  t h e s u b j e c t s were s t u d i e d In  cope,  b e h a v i o r a l and c o g n i t i v e  students  Perhaps,  will  and Hammen  strategy).  asking the i n d i v i d u a l to  on how t h e i n d i v i d u a l  Astor-Dubin  used  concerns  they  considered a t r a i t information  significance  was  have  a  event. emerged  time. reviewed  Merves, 1984),  (Folkman  1984; there  &  Pearlin & is  some  25  support only  f o r gender d i f f e r e n c e s consistent  P-focused  and  situations.  finding  E-focused  on  status,  and  compared  t o each other  is  meditation,  and  such  stress  as  1984).  physical  activity,  has  for  stress-management Kazdin  comparison viable is  and of  In  addition,  treatments  increases  expectancy conclusions  (Kazdin,  1980).  will  the  the  and s t a t e  ability  stress  have  cognitive and  techniques  thought  stopping  intervention,  been u s e d a s a t r e a t m e n t  propose  the  is  considered  when t h e p r i m a r y  commitment  to the  packages  that  accommodate use  likelihood  a  clinical  of d i f f e r e n t that  active  credibility  be s i m i l a r a c r o s s g r o u p s , y e t may  about Since  anxiety,  to relax  Research  such as r e l a x a t i o n and  (1978)  different  active  Progressive  p r o g r a m s have been shown t o be trait  most  1984).  treatment  problem.  allow  (Long,  a treatment  with  promising  also  f o r outcome r e s e a r c h  to discover  and  A  Wilson  two  in  categories.  for coping  inoculation  & Lehrer,  more  occupational  Packages—Outcome  recently,  (Woolfolk  use  y e t they a r e often  on t h e s e  techniques  more  men  status,  status  based  treatments  behavioral  women  than  marital  Stress-Management Treatment  involved  However, t h e  s t u d y d e s i g n s have f a i l e d t o  socio-economic  Traditional  that  coping  Additionally,  match men a n d women  i n coping.  ingredients  Relaxation  effective  in  (PR)  reducing  c h a n g i n g mood, a n d i n c r e a s i n g  f o r a wide v a r i e t y  of problems and  26  people  (Cangelosi,  1978;  Woolfolk  u s e d as  The  by  treatment  psychological have  been  & Rodahl,  deVries  (aerobic  and  t o be  reduces  the  Eide,  1980;  Mihevic,  linked  a natural  electrical  less  be  well as  a  herself  less  anxious.  found  tranquilizer,  in  a  and  i n the  in  of  groups  using  meprobamate, a p l a c e b o  control  group  (sitting lower  recent  psychological  tension  researchers programs  functioning  Morgan,  investigators  bodily  years  training  differences  1981;  suggest  found  because  m u s c l e and  to  support  or this  among a  EMG.  suggested to  or  exercise  measured by  used  a  research  (pill),  predicted  vigorous  this  meprobamate,  group  be  it  himself  found  Young & I s m a i l , that  deVries  were  have  can in  and  However, t h e as  Sime,  physical  a controlled  No  reading).  &  see  study  rate  Evidence  comparison  aerobic  early  relaxant  study.  g r o u p showed  An  the  i n d i v i d u a l to  exercise  significant  Folkins  exercise.  activity  the  was  both  of  (for reviews  1982).  muscle  allow  as  1982;  of  f e e d b a c k may  (e.g.,  a  benefits  accepted  1977;  benefits  exercise  aerobic  it will  exercise)  physical  widely  (1968)  psychological  In  study  Wood,  intervention.  Ledwidge,  notion  in t h i s  1983;  Interventions  exercise Astrand  & Borkovec,  w i t h w h i c h t o compare  stress-management Exercise  Heidi  e t a l . , 1982),  a standard  established  1981;  1980;  that change  directions  1976).  Several  exercise,  usually  27  jogging in  or  walking,  self-reported  Long,  1984).  that  exercise  reduction  may  Folkins  both  sedentary  1976).  The  support  for  aerobic  exercise  learning that  as  new  coping  Long,  1984).  (1984) e x e r c i s e reduces  perceives was  used  controlled assessed and  after  training tests  and  i s an  E-focused  as  a  103  by  Cooper's  Findings  indicated  fitness  (as  The  Jasnoski  measured  of  in  run  and  outcomes effective  &  Holmes,  strategy  Folkman because  Thus an  individual  anxious.  Exercise  intervention  and  initial by  effects  an  Holmes  a  17  to  31  12-minute  who  before aerobic  personality  (Cooper, levels  in a  (1981)  15-week  m e a s u r e s u s e d were  12-minute that  as  t o L a z a r u s and  less  participated  program.  reviewed  (Jasnoski  coping  &  intervention.  as  u n d e r g r a d u a t e women aged  they  Young  important  stress-management  experiment  1983;  self-efficacy  physiological arousal. as  1979;  are  exercise  According  himself/herself  al.,  therapeutic  intervention  stress  populations  (Doyne e t  enhanced  in  non-clinical  stress-management  for  role  from b o t h  studies  1979;  accumulating  and  s t r a t e g i e s are  account  stress-management  it  a  is  & Mitchell,  potential  anxiety,  may  1981;  Hilyer  reductions  Mitchell,  important  subjects  following  the  Reduced  an  individuals  a l . , 1972;  &  evidence  clinical  However,  et  Ismail,  play  significant  (Hilyer  addition,  in  t o be  in  anxiety  In  populations. tend  results  of  1968). aerobic  walk/run),  28  participation in  aerobic  i n an fitness  personality of  greater  emotional  to  tension.  could  to  problem and  prior the  to  program.  Also,  rather  been  than  interesting  posttreatment changes time,  to  an  important  A controlled subjects  by  reduced a n x i e t y  and  result  of  chronically community assigned cognitive  an  exercise  stressed residents  to  a  therapy  decreased  normal  college  Another  a comparison were  effect.  group  anxious of  a  10%  the  have  results  session  to  f o r any  Long  see  at i f the  aged  (n = 48) 24  to  exercise  (stress  65  over  intervention.  (1984)  increased  in  practice  I t would  found  that  self-efficacy  intervention.  female  10-week  and  were  v a r i a b l e s were m a i n t a i n e d  study  se  increased  improvement  compare  consideration  and  per  fitness  considered  follow-up  in psychological  of  an  a training to  a  in  subjects  be  initial  depression).  lack  i f the  (a)  p e r s o n a l i t y measures  clinical  s t u d y was  positive  and  were  these  12-minute w a l k / r u n c o u l d  effect  the  on  changes  participation  subjects  to a s c e r t a i n the  more  self-assurance  (e.g.,  this  (b)  and  self-assurance  improvements  changes  with  failure  (c)  the  expected  to  self-assurance  increased  few  se,  Specifically,  stability,  Since  be  related  were r e l a t e d t o  e a s y - g o i n g n e s s , and  students  were  fitness  related  related  program per  functioning.  levels  was  aerobic  and  as  Seventy-two male  were  (n =  randomly  intervention  inoculation).  25)  or  a  Results  29  indicated  that  treatment  self-efficacy  and  reduced  compared  to a w a i t l i s t  reports  of  less  were m a i n t a i n e d Furthermore, aerobic  at  few  exercise  to  a  and  trait  increased  that  anxiety continued  self-efficacy (Long,  1985).  p a r t i c i p a t i o n in  program  stress  perceived  addition,  follow-up  concluded  was  a  This sound  research  as is  empirical  one  Jasnoski  et  al.  f i t n e s s or m e r e l y p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n  researchers  in  compared  aerobic  exercise  and  independent  to the  women  to  control that  jogging  as  20)  validity to  of  this  differences  between  as  t o t h o s e who  compared that from  could  (n  as  three  one was  are  account  such a c t i v i t y .  the  lack  choose  assigned for  the  11).  in  compared to of  the  random  Significant to  exercise,  to e x e r c i s e ,  benefits  Thus, a l t h o u g h  8)  improved  threat  groups.  i n d i v i d u a l s who  (n =  (seif-efficacy)  self-confidence  study  These  = se  an  10-week  control  condition  However,  the  a  p a r t i c i p a t i o n per  well  c o n t r o l groups.  assignment  receive  =  c l a s s with a w a i t l i s t  indicate  internal  exist  (n  in s e l f - p e r c e i v e d a b i l i t i e s  relation  on  (1981) a s s e s s e d  change.  scores  of  studies  e n d u r a n c e program m e d i a t e s p s y c h o l o g i c a l  Findings  a  treatment.  physical  an  an  viable  inoculation  treatment.  Interestingly, whether  and  methodologically as  In  (walk/jog)  stress-management the  group.  15-month  exercise  increased  state  anxiety  i t was  alternative  groups  may  exercisers this  study  30  has  methodological  for  exercise  participation  stress-management In  above a g r o w i n g to  Kupfer,  ( f o r a review  & Robertson,  Although one an  exercise  Holmes  study  no-treatment  will  control  group  inventory  (Beck,  In  expectancy  was s i m i l a r  subjects  showed  was  due  to  conditioning  McCann  Ward,  a  fitness  for a l l  improvements  extreme  Mock,  a l l subjects test that  improvement  groups in  participation  per  se  effect.  problem  the  the exercise depression  group. and  Since  since  depression that  rather with  &  completed  before  in  i t was s u g g e s t e d  One  and  Mendelson,  and no-treatment  the program,  and  s t u d e n t s on t h e Beck  Results indicated  t o the placebo  paper,  p e r se i n  on t h e b a s i s o f  addition,  g r o u p showed a s i g n i f i c a n t  5-weeks i n t o  forthis  of a e r o b i c e x e r c i s e , a  to other c o l l e g e  12-minute w a l k / r u n  compared  for  on a sample o f 43 c o l l e g e  compared  10-week t r e a t m e n t .  to  McGowan,  instructions),  scores  Cooper's  treatment  examined.  the e f f e c t s  (relaxation  1961).  reviewed  i s accumulating  exercise  be  S u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d  Erbaugh,  studies  i s not a t o p i c  women.  Depression  viable  women.  supporting p a r t i c i p a t i o n  program  group  of  a  1985).  (1984) t e s t e d  placebo  as  s e e Simons, E p s t e i n ,  depression  controlled  se  t o the n o n - c l i n i c a l  efficacy  t o be s u p p o r t  f o r sedentary  body of l i t e r a t u r e  the  depression  per  intervention  addition  attest  problems t h e r e appears  after change  than this  the  the study  31  c o n c e r n s g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of  results  depressed c o l l e g e students  to a depressed  a clinical In is  summary,  participation  self-efficacy. problems.  For  include:  subjects  to groups,  or  a  appropriate  control  to  and  (b)  and  follow-up  failure failure  a  to to  use  and  (c)  validity (i.e., an  treatment  few  as  s t u d i e s use  left  population). (a)  t r e a t i n g non-anxious anxious  population),  (e.g., g e n e r a l i z i n g the  to determine maintenance e s s e n t i a l for follow-up  Relaxation  i s to r i d the  over  use  clinical  include:  an  use of  effective  procedures.  (PR)  was  Edmond J a c o b s o n , a p h y s i o l o g i s t , i n 1938. PR  using  to  Relaxation  Progressive  of  comparison  In a d d i t i o n , a l t h o u g h  assessments  from  assign  failure  (i.e.,  u n i v e r s i t y subjects  i s recognized  a  in  internal  randomly  non-clinical  treatment  behaviors  Progressive  to  instruments  patients).  increases  threats  g e n e r a l i z i n g to  using  to c l i n i c a l of  of  and  example,  external  generalization subjects  in  program  suffer  measure  to  exercise  studies  group,  measuring  instruments Threats  less  population  most  (a) (b)  i n an  in anxiety  However,  validity  group  perhaps  setting.  r e l a t e d to reductions  design  from  body of  tension after  an  developed The  by  purpose  r e s i d u a l t e n s i o n , which i s  untrained  relax.  According  to  Lazarus  would be  considered  an  E-focused  and  person Folkman  coping  tries  to  (1984),  PR  s t r a t e g y as  it  32  reduces  physiological  individual  perceives  PR t r a i n i n g  consists  various same  muscle  time  technique major as  with  a new  the  of l e a r n i n g  close both  groups  group  other  to  tense  tension  t h e body w h i l e  at the  to  the  feelings  relaxation.  PR b e c a u s e  i s r e l a x e d one a f t e r  until  anxious. relax  and  i s called  an  and  attention  i s added a p e r s o n parts  t e n s i o n ) and  h i m s e l f / h e r s e l f as l e s s  for relaxing  muscle  (muscle  groups throughout  paying  associated  response  e a c h of t h e  t h e o t h e r and  simultaneously  total  body  This  relaxes  relaxation  is  achieved. Numerous on  have e x a m i n e d  t h e r e d u c t i o n of a n x i e t y  Shigetomi, Woolfolk, a  studies  1979; 1984).  therapeutic  from  areas  headaches  (Redmond,  and i n s o m n i a  Ascher,  1979).  indicate  t h a t PR  (for  reviews  1978),  Furthermore, indicate therapeutic  for  &  anxiety  is  techniques  1979;  Lehrer  f o r example &  & Fowles,  St  & as  1973; T u r n e r  treatment  f o r phobias  1976;  (Reed  Saslow,  superior  anxiety, or  the  &  findings  O'Brien, &  1980), Shapiro,  research  to general  when  &  tension  Silver,  McDonald,  i s an e f f e c t i v e  PR  see B a r r i o s  t e n s i o n r e d u c t i o n comes  Gaylor,  (Borkovec  in relation  o f PR  s u p p o r t i n g t h e use o f PR  Additionally,  test  that  Sides,  Andrasik,  see Borkovec  and  &  as h e a l t h b e h a v i o r ,  (Blanchard,  hypertension 1974),  technique  such  ( f o r reviews  Borkovec Evidence  the e f f e c t s  equal research  Mathews, 1980). findings to  other design  33  includes &  stressed  Fremouw,  ability  for  1982;  t o use  outside  of  any  the  equally  Woolfolk  two  et  a  in  were  randomly  assigned  self-monitoring  control.  community to  than  be  on  maintained  test  measured  the  and  meditation  symptoms of  residents.  or  and  groups  somatic  subjects.  a  showed arousal,  These  enhanced  daily  Subjects  meditation,  anxiety,  control  situation  reviewed.  PR  PR,  the  most v i t a l  have  Both treatment  improvements  either  that  ameliorating  stressed  were c a l m e r  i s the  (Gross  Since  stressful  (1982) f o u n d  f o r 34  were  in  a l . , 1982).  training will  stress  and  et  studies  al.  effective  significant  random a s s i g n m e n t  t r a i n i n g session  e f f e c t s of  Woolfolk  and  relaxation  therapy,  generalized  subjects  at  gains 6-month  follow-up. Similarily,  PR  and  Cognitive  Restructuring  t r e a t m e n t s b o t h showed d e c r e a s e d a n x i e t y waitlist  control  speech-anxious assigned hours  to  and  group  outcome  (video-tape  of  anxiety,  heart  groups a  and  group.  group  measures  did  not  untreated  groups.  rate. the but  who  state  were  1982)  were  Treatment  measures  speech),  i m p r o v e d on  waitlist  ( G r o s s & Fremouw,  undergraduates each  compared  a  for  63  randomly  g r o u p s met overt  anxiety,  to  for  behavior  fear,  I n t e r e s t i n g l y , both  social  treatment  s e l f - r e p o r t measures compared behavioral  discriminate  and  5  to  physiological  between the  treated  and  34  Consequently,  because  treatment  for  considered  a standard  which  compare  to  addition to  reducing  improve  anxiety,  will  Self-efficacy  Theory  the  one  self-efficacy  are  defined  as  an  will  1977).  Both e f f i c a c y  lead  a person's b e l i e f Self-efficacy  people's  to  and  Becker,  Rosenstock,  will the  levels be task  of  thought  defined  also a  and  (Bandura,  those  low  in  using  expectations.  as  convictions that  will  expectations  estimate  that a  outcome  and  (Strecher, Thus, a  given  (Bandura, reflect  behaviors. to  affect  behavior  r e a c t i o n s s u c h as  about  1977)  change  p e r s i s t e n c e of c o p i n g  1986).  of  section.  considered  patterns  of  outcome  capabilities  and  appear  outcome e x p e c t a t i o n s  are  In  result  next  outcome  certain  self-efficacy  l e s s anxious than  a  emotional  and  high  program.  concept  Theory  while  about  or d i s t r e s s &  as  i n the  and  are  expectations  initiation  w e l l as  with  The  individual's  behavior  as  technique  s u c c e s s f u l l y execute behaviors  to s u c c e s s f u l coping  the  i t is  explain behavior  lead  both  study  individuals  Learning  expectations  can  this  exercise  discussed  Social  of  Self-efficacy that  be  t o p r e d i c t and  concepts  well-researched  in  programs.  self-efficacy  a  self-efficacy  stress-management  attempts  anxiety  aerobic  their  Bandura's  is  stress-management  an  to reducing  PR  anxiety  DeVellis,  individuals  with  particular  task  more c o n f i d e n t self-efficacy.  in  performing  35  Self-efficacy  theory  based treatments w i l l perceived  seif-efficacy,  generalized  increase  but  an  residents  (N  that  =  Ewart, T a y l o r ,  R e e s e , and  to  subjects  treadmill who  59  greater  after  and  on  in  increased  exercise  more g e n e r a l  activity).  changes  in  progressive perceived  relaxation)  been  found a  subjects showed  subjects  session  not  but  efficacy  who only  increased regarding  i t appears  that  exercise  mediated  by  and  changes  in  increase  as  self-efficacy.  Self-efficacy the  men  after  test  than  aerobic be  40  and  The  treadmill  (e.g.,  may  Similarily,  session.  self-efficacy  (i.e.,  exercise  infaction  From t h e s e e x a m p l e s  behavior  their  (1983) s t u d i e d  counselling  self-efficacy  community  increased  self-efficacy  to  example,  self-efficacy  the  The  specific  stressed  a myocardial their  more  shown  For  therapy.  Debusk  performed poorly.  sexual  been  10-week a e r o b i c  a counselling  better  increases  a  to  of  self-efficacy.  have  cognitive  improved  test  performed  a  after  levels  lead  of  significantly  or  that  performance  to higher also  chronically  73)  self-efficacy  52  may  that  individual's self-efficacy.  intervention  aged  lead  interventions  (1984) f o u n d  general  only  expectations  Stress-management  Long  not  predicts  result  of  found  performance  an to  expectations  intervention be  more  (as  not  only  shown above) but  accurate  t h a n outcome e x p e c t a t i o n s  predictors (Bandura,  have of 1977;  36  Lee,  1982, 1984). Since  studies  there  are  on p r o g r e s s i v e  investigating behavior,  Stuart,  1981),  1984),  and  any,  well-researched  as a p r e d i c t o r  supporting  i n research  Lichtenstein,  if  r e l a x a t i o n and a e r o b i c  self-efficacy  evidence  explored  few,  this  exercise  v a r i a b l e of  theory  will  be  on smoking c e s s a t i o n  (Condiotte  &  obesity  (Mitchell  &  an  treatments  exercise  treatment  (Kaplan et  a l . , 1984). Condiotte cigarette smoking  cessation  smoking  Lichtenstein  smokers aged  self-monitoring  (d)  and  16 t o  questionnaire,  a  mood  self-efficacy.  perceived  self-efficacy  to  treatment were n o t  longer  who  a  enhanced  of  and  treatment.  the  after  However,  one  strongly the  subjects  treatment  used  g r o u p programs were u s e d f o r  to generalize  Also,  l e v e l s of  were  abstinence  f o r the  though t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n  is difficult  higher  at posttreatment  assigned  r e p o r t , and  significantly  Although expectancies  it  self-efficacy  groups  Furthermore,  periods  (a) a  Both  the  even  in  assessment.  programs w h i l e  similar  participated  ( c ) an i n f o r m a n t ' s  individual other.  78  specific  and a t 6-month f o l l o w - u p . randomly  assessed  M e a s u r e s used were:  treatments)  perceived  related  (b)  states  (individual/group  70  programs.  diary,  (1981)  from  strategies  analysis  were  varied,  individual to  statistical  s t u d y u s e d many i n d i v i d u a l t - t e s t s .  groups  group  for this  37  Mitchell Weight =  and  Stuart  W a t c h e r members aged  101)  were more l i k e l y at  success  than a c t u a l  rather  amount  of  theory  does  always  produce  self-efficacy  because  themselves  repeated  previous  Watchers'  treatments are  perhaps  too  Kaplan  self-expectancy  study  very  (1984)  perceived be  in a  related lost  of  perhaps  addition,  is  found  program  group.  prescriptions prior  3-month f o l l o w - u p  the  randomly  level The  and  to  success. specific  correlated for  60  older In  assigned  given  to  cognitive or  increased  specific also  an  individual  group meetings.  groups  their  researchers  Weight  modification  were  to the  treatment  to  paid  a  modification,  All  due  Pulmonary D i s e a s e .  cognitive-behavioral  attention-control  to  oriented,  being  that  of  fail  since  positively  were  behavior  with  expectations individuals  walking  the  treatment  behaviorally  Obstructive  subjects  self-efficacy.  In  (n low  congruent  successful,  regular  this  activity  report  groups  success  f o r w a l k i n g was  with Chronic  exercise  is  attention  al.  to a  modification,  dropouts  to  (both  strong  failure.  adults  treatments  female  p a r t i c i p a n t s s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n of  et  with adhering  that  seemed t o  This that  as  little  the  success  sometimes  perceive  increasing  65)  (414  Interestingly,  weight).  (1977)  not  to  would d r o p out  Bandura's  found  stayers  pretest.  p r e d i c t i n g who  same  20  than  self-efficacy  to  (1984)  At  their walking  suggested  that  38  specific  rather  behavior  that  generalized  changes.  Bandura's  personal  are  initiated.  present  However,  (1977) t h e o r e t i c a l  of  mastery are  the  this  notion  likely  Furthermore, most  1977), t h e y  not  since  perceived  self-efficacy  only  but  personal  high  of  self-efficacy,  to  (Ewart e t In that  generalize  summary,  behavioral et  an  from t h e  in  of  generalized  once e s t a b l i s h e d ,  studies  reviewed  al.,  1983).  are  situations  and  can  be  may  be an  to  specifically,  Bandura's  (1978)  self-efficacy  would  self-efficacy  is  appears  associated  with  Lichtenstein,  suggest  e n h a n c e d as an  functioning  and  as  perceived  self-efficacy  a  1982;  participation  have result  predictor  intervention. conceptualization that  result it  the  effective  the  r e l a t e d to p e r s i s t e n c e that  it  A d d i t i o n a l l y , researchers  self-efficacy  (e.g.,  are &  adherence  persi st.  levels  Therefore,  stressful  for  behavior  information  to higher  other  (Condiotte  intervention  variable  of  self-efficacy.  self-efficacy  change  shown t h a t of  they  a l . , 1984).  changes  Ewart  to  once  treatments  p e r h a p s t o more  of  to  expectancies  enactive  lead  mediate  contrary  that  source  expectations  thought  is  to g e n e r a l i z e  influential  (Bandura,  levels  expectancies  may  of be  in  level in a  More of of  behavioral change  possible exercise)  in that will  39  Adherence  to E x e r c i s e  Current people the  who  first  research  suggests  start  exercise  few  1985).  an  months  According found  exercise  adherence  exercise  activity, least  accrue,  exercise  1980).  appears  that  self-efficacy improvement  strategy  must  be  to  will  persist  will to  not  even  the  low  of  of  basis Sports  reviewed i t higher  at a task.  lead  such  benefits  a regular  College  a  and  levels  research  during  that  factors  score  longer  greater  Dubbert,  physical  who  only  within  paticipation  (American  According  of  (1982), v a r i a b l e s  p e r f o r m e d on  individuals  but  Martin  psychological  in self-efficacy  intervention  &  from  t i m e s a week  Medicine,  1982;  exercise  include  majority stop  However, f o r t h e  to  three  the  program w i l l  Dishman  effect  seif-efficacy.  of  at  to  that  (Dishman, to  have been  as  Programs  in  Perhaps,  stress-management to  adherence  a to  new an  coping exercise  program. Summary In  summary,  support:  (a)  there  two  are  evidence  Folkman basic  E-focused  (Lazarus  1982),  (b)  that  lower  levels  1985),  (c)  P-focused  &  that  been  presented  to  (1980) t h e o r y  that  coping--P-focused  and  Lazarus'  functions  of  Folkman,  P-focused of  and  and  has  1984;  coping  is  Moos &  associated  stress  (Billings  & Moos,  women  compared  to  men  coping  in  most  E-focused  Billings, with  1981;  Finn,  use  more  stressful  40  situations Lazarus, not  yet  (Astor-Dubin  1980), and been  Vitaliano  et  al.,  shown  with  Lichtenstein,  1985).  et  self-efficacy  adherence  (Lazarus  decrease  (Ewart  to  1981;  an  1984;  Folkman  t h a t measurement of  interventions,  to  self-efficacy Additionally,  Hammen,  standardized  stress-management been  (d)  &  has  enactive  has  & Folkman,  1984;  With  regard  to  aerobic  exercise  anxiety al.,  coping  &  and  1983;  been  found  treatment  K a p l a n e t a l . , 1984).  Long,  has  increase 1984).  to c o r r e l a t e (Condiotte  &  41  Method Subjects The  subjects  articles  in  relaxation the  150  were  local  solicited  newspapers  respondents  83  were  telephone  screening  telephone  screening  and  two  work-related  on  Walk's  less  during  medically screened & Gruber, randomly  fee  3 times  the  past  and  3  assigned  to identify scored  months,  at least  5 or  above  ( c ) they  (d)  were  than  they  30 were  i n the walk/jog  program as  Collins,  Davenport,  they  to either  were a s k e d  were w a i v e d (n = 3 ) .  (e)  following  p e r week f o r l e s s  by P a r Q ( C h i s h o l m , 1975),  the  Thermometer,  f i t to participate  participants Fees  meeting  (b) t h e y  Tension  than  A for  i n t e r v i e w f o r m s ) and 72 were  stressors,  (1956)  Of  interviewed  (see Appendix  (a) t h e women were a b l e  exercising  w o r k i n g women  personally  f o r t h e program a f t e r  criteria:  minutes  offering  and  or e x e r c i s e stress-management programs.  following  accepted  v i a posters  Kulak,  were  program.  willing  to  be  In a d d i t i o n , a l l  t o pay a n o m i n a l  fee  ($15.00).  f o r s u b j e c t s who c o u l d n o t a f f o r d t h e  See A p p e n d i x  B f o r the Par Q and  Tension  Thermometer. The (M  =  participants  39.8,  married,  SD  =  9.6).  33% were s i n g l e  widowed, s e p a r a t e d , the  were w o r k i n g  participants  and  women, aged  Thirty-three the  or d i v o r c e d .  had a u n i v e r s i t y  24 t o 59  percent  remaining  34%  were were  S i x t y - f o u r percent of education  a n d 36% h a d  42  a c o l l e g e or subject  high  characteristics  At  pretest  stressors  examples of  study  conflict  72  and  Design  All  until  held  Q,  or  they  were at  an  last the  randomly  chosen  the  reducing  Relaxation  for  at  the  attending  the  first  included  initiated  an  the  of  n  number =30).  through  U n i v e r s i t y of  informed  5  minutes  subject  was  date, Prior  time t o the  STAI-T  and  administered.  At  and  the  end  Columbia.  the  following  the  Thermometer, d i d not  interview at  The  that  subjects  place of  the  the  first  Self-efficacy of  the  first  which  time  were  of  know  to  opened c o n t a i n i n g  beginning  General  British  researcher of  e n v e l o p e was  told  personal  Tension  assigned,  group assignment.  a  consent  The  indicating  the  contains  attend  already  were a d m i n i s t e r e d :  treatment  meeting.  had  screened  7-Day R e c a l l .  the  the  C  and  requirements  Reasons f o r not  (n=4), t h e r e b y  subjects  signing  Par  Appendix  the  ( E x e r c i s e n=31,  questionnaires WCC,  (54.6%),  Procedures.  interview After  (41.0%).  s u b j e c t s d i d not  (n=7)  program  and  workload  stressors.  11  time  61  work-related  questionnaires  not  to  frequent  of  1.  in Table  completed  session.  subjects  summary  the  treatment  exercise  A  r e s p o n d e n t s met  interview,  having  most  demanding  perceived  Although  initial  a  education.  i s presented  the  were  interpersonal  the  school  first  a  a  form then group  session,  Scale  were  treatment  ,43 Table 1 Subject  Characteristics  Demographics Age  (N = 72)  (mean, r a n g e )  Marital  39  24-59  Status.  Married  33%  Single  34%  Div/Sep/Wid  33%  Children 1 o r more c h i l d r e n  54%  No c h i l d r e n  46%  Education High School  28%  1-3 Y e a r s C o l l e g e  12%  University/College Professional Years  Degree  Degree  9%  i n Workforce 0-3  17%  4-6  18%  7-9  21%  10-over Years  (MA,PhD)  51%  i n Present  44% Position  (mean, r a n g e ) 5 . 5  1-10  44  session All  of  the the  subjects  mentioned  period. all  University the  were  of  of  the  Dependent  at weeks  Columbia  at  8-week  Anxiety.  Anxiety  Spielberger,  Gorsuch,  that  proneness over  reflects  of  The  8-week  completing  the  in a group at  the  were  in  appear  reassessed  in  has  relaxation  This  inventory 20  apprehension,  and  c o e f f i c i e n t s are  (.73  .92)  support 1970).  the  and  validity  of  by  STAI-T  differences  in the  a stress reaction evidencing  been  used  and is  1  well  as  brief  the  STAI  outcome  to  on  a  never" to  tolerance been  4  tension,  Reliability  e v i d e n c e has  a  self-report  reflecting  within  to  treatment  responded "almost  It  chronic an  exercise a  scores  extensive  the  characterize  tearfulness.  validity  The  thus  from  "almost always") with high  with  developed  (1970).  to  statements  (ranging  measured  situational variables.  both  scale  was  to manifest  STAI-T  measure c o n s i s t i n g of  al.,  the  individual  circumstances,  programs.  to  and  Lushene  a wide range of  a tendency  tension.  to  of  (STAI-T)  and  anxiety  4-point  above  post-treatment.  Inventory  stable  measure  the  after  Anxiety  measures r e l a t i v e l y  variety  with  end  met  completed.  Measures  Trait  subject  the  subjects  British  was  reassessed  Eight  same manner as  Trait  questionnaire  questionnaires  treatment program  expectancy  and levels  presented  (Spielberger  et  45  General (1982)  Self-efficacy  developed  a  self-efficacy  which  self-efficacy  theory.  responded ranging  t o on  from  17  self-efficacy et  General  internal  was  success  t o 238)  where h i g h  Scale  was  was  scale  and  on  1983).  by  of  original  Coping  was  scale  while  1984)  i s s c o r e d on  event  is identified  items to  described  on  a 4-point  stressful  then  to  a great  .86),  by  and  areas.  confirming  scores  on  personality  the  measures  reliability  (WCC).  stressful  has  Folkman  on  scale.  event  (Lazarus A recent  a checklist a 4-point  deal")  event.  a b i n a r y yes/no  the more r e c e n t v e r s i o n  "used  =  high  and  a q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o measure  scored  responded  Sherer  students,  military  between  Checklist  and  high  measure.  copes with a s p e c i f i c WCC  by  sum  p r e d i c t e d past  Test-retest  (1980) d e v e l o p e d  a person  used"  alpha  other  a  indicate  study  demonstrated  predicted relationships  items  demonstrated  supported  been e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h i s  Lazarus  In t h e  (Cronbach's  validity  Ways  17  i n t r o d u c t o r y psychology  Self-efficacy  & Adams,  of  (1977)  (yielding  scores  i n v o c a t i o n a l , e d u c a t i o n a l and  self-efficacy (Sherer  scale  al.  general  Bandura's  consists  Likert  et  assess  on  (see A p p e n d i x D ) .  validity  Construct several  based  14-point  Sherer  to  This scale  consistency  criterion  67  measure  a l . which u t i l i z e d  the  not  a  Scale.  is  i n mind.  how  Their response  & Folkman, stressful  consisting  of  scale  (from  "not  answered  with  the  46  The coping: that  checklist (a)  problem-focused  describe  behavioral problem  incorporates  cognitive  coping  (e.g.,  I  cognitive  whole  made  a  100  and  .80  for  of  the  measure  (2  described 7-Day  (see  physical properties  problems  accurately  in  (1984) d e v e l o p e d subjects over  the  subjects  to  past  week.  recorded  m i n u t e s ) , and  intensity.  subject's  subjective  activity  rated  on  (in  a  scale  2 was  E-focused of  this is  of  good due  to  Blair  which  requires  physical  activity  t y p e of  activity,  to  days),  of  have  to obtain  I n t e n s i t y was  feelings  (for  exercise.  of  addition  frequency  study  Self-report  that  difficult  pattern  In  in a  the  s t u d y and  F).  measuring  their  forget for  the  a s e l f - r e p o r t inventory  record  at  E.  Appendix  are  (b)  coefficient  in this  activity  psychometric  to  mean  for  used  the  describe  modification  i n Appendix  Recall of  alpha  A  was  tried  the  .81  1980).  in d e t a i l  I  and  and  subscales)  of  directed  were examined  scale)  P-focused  & Lazarus,  efforts  residents  and  a c t i o n ) ; and  consistencies  scales  each  (Folkman  measures  Internal  community  efforts  (E-focused) that  (e.g.,  of  (P-focused)  source  of  behavioral  E-focused  administrations  plan  items  thing).  P - f o c u s e d and of  items  problem-solving  managing e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s the  categories  s t r a t e g i e s f o r managing t h e  emotion-focused coping the  two  duration recorded  fatigue 6 to  20  with  (Borg,  (in  as  the each  1973).  47  Activities or  not  of an  of a w o r k - n a t u r e  included. level  of  Recall post  Since fitness  was  and  was  residents  an  of a c t i v i t y ,  types  of  over  reported  total  activity The  and  asked;  had,  and  (i.e., very 7-Day  (b) how they  hard  it  from  physical activity.  for  how  activities).  One  the  7-Day pre,  The  was  of  the  i n d i c a t e the and  vigorous  .75.  In  activities  £  =  .83  Taylor  while  et  al.  7-Day R e c a l l i n v e n t o r y  and s e l f - r e p o r t e d a mean age  of  s l e e p the  52  they  subjects  engaged  e x a m p l e s of m o d e r a t e , h a r d researchers agreed  direct  problem with  to  interviewer-administered  many h o u r s of  The  the  product-moment  s e s s i o n was  was  significantly and  community  e s t a b l i s h e d (n  Pearson  was  the  of  population.  many h o u r s of a c t i v i t y  activity  than  expenditure,  30 m a l e s w i t h  were g i v e n  Recall  rather  version  large  number of  7-Day R e c a l l (a)  not  time at  measure t o  reliability  activity  a  measure of p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t y  physical years.  a  interview  (1984) compared d a t a a direct  were  study,  in a survey  caloric  week p e r i o d .  each  f o r moderate  floors)  in this  that  for  between t h e  at  focus  appropriate  test-retest  correlation  stretching)  participation,  found  activities  a two  scrubbing  (1985),  (N = 2,126),  pattern  53)  (e.g.,  for a l l groups.  al.  7-Day R e c a l l was  addition,  the  nature  t o d e s c r i b e change o v e r  follow-up et  (e.g., exercise  used  Sallis  aerobic  this  found  with  measures study  may  that  in and the  self-report of be  physical that  the  48  self-report accuracy  (log  of  Recall  the  have  book  of  activities)  7-Day R e c a l l .  been  Versions  utilized  in  Haney,  1986;  Nader,  1985).  Physical activity  total  number  of  duration  Sallis  Manipulation An  different given  program  the  first,  see  how  three  to  was  practise  obtain  pre-  how  well  extent  the of  (Exefort).  was  used  a  to check  conditions  the  subjects  their  anxiety  more  exercise  and  to post-treatment. expectancy  was  administered  follow-up were  that  (Kazdin, In  measure  e x e r c i s e or  the  were  for a n a l y s i s .  objective an  generated  Questionnaires 8-week  the  of  relaxation relaxation  See  Appendix  F  items.  Measures  end  of  the  descriptive  Subjects  &  product  and  confident  to monitor  A questionnaire the  last  sessions,  used  from  Ancillary  the  i t e m s were summed  a d e s c r i p t i o n of  gain  intensity  eliminate  between  calendar  at  and  experimental  the  would  The  practice  (Long &  measured u s i n g  demand c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .  addition,  for  that  to  1980).  studies  7-Day  Check  after  sessions the  was  expectancy q u e s t i o n n a i r e  possibility  the  the  Wallace, McKenzie,  (Exday)  in minutes times  of  other  e t a l . , 1985;  days  enhanced  were they  treatment  information  asked were  jogging  or  and  at  coping  with  r e l a x a t i o n was  all  subjects  8-week f o l l o w - u p  about  to estimate,  to  on  the  treatments.  a 5-point  stress helping  to  and them  scale,  to  what  relieve  49  stress.  In a d d i t i o n ,  thought  differently,  differently to  what  as  to l i s t  also  asked  them for  they  (In the  asked  indicated  and  what  achieved  initial  how  they  they  a consequence of the  degree  program.  they  were  and  doing  interventions  their  session  felt  goals  and  for  the  a l l participants  were  t h r e e p e r s o n a l outcome g o a l s ) .  They  were  what a s p e c t s of t h e p r o g r a m were h e l p f u l  in learning  to cope w i t h  t h e p o s t and  stress.  (See A p p e n d i x  to F  follow-up questionnaire).  Treatments The ranged  treatment  in size  similar 1984).  to The  groups  from  (2 r e l a x a t i o n  14 t o  the  group  groups  met  16  2 exercise)  participants.  size for  and  in  This  other studies  eight  is  (Long,  1  1/2-hour  weekly  components  designed  to  be  treatment  and  sessions. The present the  main in  and  both  relaxation  discussing  treatment  the e x e r c i s e  treatment  of  stress-management, form  to  record  practice learning  (b)  each  ilitators.  a  and  initial effects  treatment the  use  of a  intensity  (c) a s k i l l  t e c h n i q u e , and with  (a) an  causes  feelings,  sessions,  atmosphere fac  were:  definitions,  presentation  (walk/jog)  co-leaders  of  stress  rationale  for  self-monitoring and  development  (d) an  session  length  of  approach  to  informal supportive  acting  as  models  and  50  The two  treatment  groups  relaxation walk/jog  components t h a t  were  relaxation  treatment  and  differentiated  through  aerobic  a  the  progressive  exercise  through  a  program.  Leaders. conducted  Initial  by  the  screening  experimenter.  treatment  of  E d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m , and  from  Social  Psychology  All  had  experience  one  l e a d e r per  leading  adult  exercise  programs.  groups  group  was  cardio-pulmonary  and  at  meetings  were the  held  procedures  similarity  of approach  Long's  treatment (1984)  Manual  was  relaxation  treatment  behind  for  in  treatments (1973)  Hence,  conditions  series  order  to that Aerobic  based  Progressive  the d e t a i l e d  and  treatments  purposes  exercise  were  a  and  of  to  of the the  ensure  groups.  similar  the  Work  t h e t r e a t m e n t s , and  involved  program  the  masters  aid  the  sessions,  discuss  across  first  Before  Stress-Management used  Borkovec's Manual.  to  rationales  specific  A  in  resuscitation.  d u r i n g the treatment  i n the  least  qualified  began and  project,  students  groups  by  Counselling  graduate  The  were  were c o - l e d Physical  female  interviews  described in Conditioning  group on  Berstein  Relaxation  manuals p r e p a r e d  formed  the  basis  while  the and  Training for  both  for co-leader  training. Exercise exercise  Walk/Jog  Program.  as a s t r e s s - m a n a g e m e n t  A  treatment  rationale was  for  presented  51  at  the  first  muscle  session  relaxant  were p l a c e d  on  to  their  increase  exercise  and  before  subjects  3  days they  p r a c t i c e d , the  and  f e e l i n g s before  and  after  to e x e r c i s i n g  as  a  Prior  discussed  in a supportive  followed the  by  in  problems  8-10  a walk/jog  set  their  own  pace  exertion.  consisted  of  jogging  injury  such  as:  and  (d)  (a) and  after  each to  recording  the  exercised  successes  and  jogging  were  the  group  to Then  stretching exercises  Subjects  final  the  encouraged  increasing lengths.  d i s c u s s i o n s and  prevention  fitness,  The  and  group,  related  the  In  exercise.  a t t e n t i o n and  on  encouraged  flexibility  own,  atmosphere.  to each p a r t i c i p a n t .  perceived  to  of  subjects  time they  minutes of  walk/jog, personal  given  their  amount of  and  participated  any  week on  failures  Then  manner.  were  practice  their  natural  slow-stretch  practised  times per  a  were  in a gradual  sessions,  In a d d i t i o n ,  as  a distractor).  distance  were  walk/jog.  as  exercise  a w a l k / j o g p r o g r a m and  group  exercises  (i.e.,  While  encouragement  was  were e n c o u r a g e d  to  b a s i s of h e a r t part  on  of  l e c t u r e s on  rate  each  and  session  topics related  proper  running  shoes,  (b)  treatment,  (c)  components  of  exercise  principles  and  exercise  maintenance. Progressive relaxation four  Relaxation.  program  sessions  f o r the  The  c o n s i s t e d of  progressive two  basic  16 m u s c l e g r o u p s , and  muscle  phases: (b)  (a)  three  52  sessions  f o r the 7 muscle groups.  encouraged least  to  practice  as  often  3 t i m e s p e r week on t h e i r A  rationale  stress-management muscles  to  for  at the f i r s t  group  session  of  review  of the previous subjects'  subjects  then  exercise.  practise  an  In a d d i t i o n ,  attaining  the l a t e r  on  going.  actual  part  Each  10-15 m i n u t e  were  the  a  relaxing  and a d i s c u s s i o n  in  as  session.  initial  sessions  participated  and  relaxation,  h o m e o s t a s i s ) was p r e s e n t e d  the  but a t  Relaxation  (tightening  session  were  own.  complete  /consisted  subjects  as p o s s i b l e  Progressive  technique  attain  The  how The  relaxation  of e a c h  session  consisted  of both small  and l a r g e  g r o u p d i s c u s s i o n s on:  (a)  t h e e x p e r i e n c e was l i k e  f o r the p a r t i c i p a n t s ,  (b)  what  the importance  (cramps,  focusing  psychological (e)  were  reduce a t t r i t i o n ,  material  that  contacted  all  attention),  was  to  (d) of  common  relaxation,  (Median  participants in  missed.  If  the  the p a r t i c i p a n t .  and  tense. both  leader  a t t e n d e d was 5.9 of 8 = 6).  problems  p h y s i o l o g i c a l and  phone t h e g r o u p l e a d e r s  she t e l e p h o n e d  of s e s s i o n s  groups  (c)  and use o f r e l a x a t i o n when  encouraged  number  practice,  changes as a r e s u l t  recognition To  of  groups  t o review was  not  The a v e r a g e sessions  for  53  Results Group  Comparability  on  Demographics  and  Dependent  Measures Prior  to the i n t e r v e n t i o n s , a l l s u b j e c t s  displayed The  overall  score for  evidence  of  as evidenced  35.8  reported  by S p i e l b e r g e r  a g r o u p o f n o r m a l male and f e m a l e Chi-square  r e l a x a t i o n (n*s=l7,  (n's=l8,  20).  demographic current  no  education,  session  were for  age  relaxation under  but t h e r e  groups  N  =  39 compared t o o n l y the  the  d r o p o u t s were or  were  years  d e p e n d e n t measures were v e r y  of  in current  small  (n=l0). these job,  difference  younger  age  first  among  with  (none above  or  for  In the  (66%  40% f o r t h e e x e r c i s e  correlations  No  unavailable  72)= 7.35,2<•03.). were  and  subjects  assessment  was a s i g n i f i c a n t  (2,  26)  for analysis.  differences  status,  in  g r o u p s were  attend  follow-up  group the s u b j e c t s  However, a s  (n=21)  sessions  significant  four  (n's=25,  who d i d n o t  or  marital  (Chi-Square  groups  group  3 o r fewer  no  these  (n=11) w h i l e  posttreatment  education,  f o r the  no d i f f e r e n c e s were f o u n d on t h e  show/dropout  who a t t e n d e d  groups  undergraduates.  t e s t s were computed  i n t o two t r e a t m e n t  treatment  There  (1970)  17) and t h e two e x e r c i s e  shows were t h e s u b j e c t s  for  et a l .  mean  v a r i a b l e s o f age, m a r i t a l s t a t u s , y e a r s  j o b , and  collapsed one  Since  72)  by S T A I - T .  g r o u p mean o f 46.1 was w e l l above t h e  Initially two  of anxiety  (N =  were  groups). a l l the .13),  i t  54  is  unlikely  would  that  influence  Subject  this  treatment  attend  more  treatment subject  than  session,  3  group  attended  sample  7  size  classes,  a t t h e time  complete  attended posttest  50  (n  thus  t o 53.  =  f o r the p o s t t e s t ,  one o t h e r and  one  the one  i n the  subject  did  although  she  for pretest  and  questionnaires  for  not  although  s u b j e c t was  Consequently, 25  reducing Additionally,  ( h e r d a t a were u s e d  analysis).  was  (no shows) d i d  and 8 ( d r o p o u t s ) d i d n o t  of p o s t t e s t  follow-up  6 classes  11  sessions,  c o u l d n o t be l o c a t e d  hospital  size  difference  effects.  t h e i n i t i a l 72 s u b j e c t s ,  show up f o r t h e f i r s t  not  age  Attrition  Of  she  between-group  the  relaxation,  final n  =  sample 25  for  exerc i s e ) . Compared mean  score  higher  standard  groups  anxiety  score  deviations).  dropout  group than  the  dropout  more  the treatment  (39.0) was l o w e r  (see  Table  2  used  to test  treatment  groups  dependent  measures  than  the  f o r means and  self-efficacious  that  the  and  less  groups.  Differences/Self-efficacy  A one-way m u l t i v a r i a t e  group's  (183.1) was c o n s i d e r a b l y  T h i s i s an i n d i c a t i o n  was  Pretreatment  was  groups  for self-efficacy  and f o r t r a i t  treatment  anxious  to treatment  analysis  of  for pre-treatment (relaxation of t r a i t  and  and S T A I .  variance  (MANOVA)  differences  between  exercise)  a n x i e t y and  on  the  self-efficacy  Table  2  Means and S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s o f Outcome  STAI  Self-Efficacy SD  M  M  SD  Measures  E-focused M  SD  P-focused M  SD  Exefort M  SD  Exday M  SD  Group E x e r c i s e (n = 25) Pre  46.6  9.2  168.3  32.2  11.3  7.5  16.7  7.0  483.6  953.5  1. 1  1.5  Post  41.0  9.0  176.2  31 .4  11.4  5.5  19.8  7.3  1358  629.5  3.7  1.3  Follow-up  37.9  7.7  180.9  24.2  9.7  6.2  18.1  7.1  1558  1635  2.9  1.9  Relaxation  (n=25)  Pre  48.6  10.0  146.6  36. 1  13.6  10.2  14.5  8.5  487.2  662.6  1 .0  1 .4  Post  43.4  9.4  166.6  32.8  11.8  7.8  15.6  6.5  977.8  711.7  2.5  1.8  41.7  9.3  163.0  37.4  11.0  6.6  14.0  7.2  853.4  990.0  2.0  1.7  Follow-up  Note.  STAI=Trait Anxiety, E-focused=Emotion-focused coping, P-focused=Problem-focused intensity  of e x e r c i s e ,  coping, Exefort=minutes X  Exday=frequency  i n days.  56  (see  Table  2 f o r means a n d s t a n d a r d  overall  MANOVA  p_<.064.  The  determine  i s lower  and  than  subdomains  was  those  d i d not d i f f e r  treatment.  Furthermore, Exefort)  indicating  that  (M =  172.6).  was p e r f o r m e d t o  initially  i n e i t h e r of  indicating  i n the they  a MANOVA  was  treatment  no  also  Therefore  number  of  used  prior  on  P-focused to the  pretest  exercise  nonsignificant,  groups  had  The  initial  f o r c o p i n g , F<1.  strategies  (Exdays,  for  ( P - f o c u s e d and E - f o c u s e d ) .  between g r o u p s  E-focused  157.8  r e p o r t e d by S h e r e r e t  A MANOVA  differed  The  F(2,48)=2.90,  of  students  nonsignificant  differences the groups  score  Exercise.  i f the groups  coping  MANOVA  and  mean  (1982) f o r 376 c o l l e g e Coping  the  nonsignificant,  overall  self-efficacy al.  was  deviations).  similar  F<1,  exercise  habits before the treatments. Manipulation To  Check  evaluate  the  subjects'  interventions  effectiveness,  pretest  posttest.  with  and  repeated  expectancy  F(1,49)=7.20, effect, group  £<.009,  ratings  on  a  time  and  a  relaxation both groups  interaction  group  (F<1.)  mean was l o w e r  increased their  by t i m e  group  significant There  ANOVA  post)  main  at  on  effect,  time  main  was no s i g n i f i c a n t  Although than  of the  provided  (pre to  significant  F ( 1 , 49) =4 . 87 , p_<.03.  by t i m e  were  A ( 2 X 2 ) groups  measures  revealed  expectations  the  overall  the exercise  expectancy  similarily  mean, over  57  time.  See T a b l e 3 f o r means a n d s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f  expectancy  scores.  Treatment  Effects  Two  two-way  preplanned for  nonorthogonal  significance  follow-up), anxiety  and  post)  and  Trait  (post  to  the  and  F(2,47)=11.39,  tests  time  were  f o r the  treatment  and i n c r e a s e d  posttreatment  with  treatment  repeated preplanned  differential  groups  on t h e  a n x i e t y and s e l f - e f f i c a c y .  a  group  main  significant  p_<.00l.  significant  pre- to  that  anxiety  A  evaluate  significant  no  p_<.l83.  two  and  effect,  time  The (trait  (pre t o  univariate anxiety,  a n d s e l f - e f f i c a c y , F ( 1 , 48 ) = 1 4 . 34 ,  F(2,47)=1.76, the  P-focused  Self-Efficacy.  a nonsignificant  was  trait  effect.  post) e f f e c t ,  interaction  (b)  (a)  to  below  p_<.14,  There  on:  post  to follow-up) are presented  and  F( 1 , 48 > = 1 5. 33 , p_<.00l  post;  test  (pre  between  F ( 2 , 47 ) =2 . 04 ,  P_<.001).  and  Dunn's  contrasts  performed  revealed  for  (pre to  separately  measures of t r a i t  Analysis  using  ( g r o u p by t i m e ) MANOVA  was  effectiveness  MANOVA's w i t h two  the preplanned  t h e time  2 X 3  dependent  contrasts .025  Only  Anxiety  contrasts  time)  self-efficacy,  when d i s c u s s i n g  measures,  at  by  were p e r f o r m e d  E-focused coping. to  (group  posttreatment  Examining groups  their  in similar  group  by  time  contrast,  t h e means i t a p p e a r s reduced  self-efficacy  magnitudes.  their  trait  from p r e - t o  Table  58  3  Means and S t a n d a r d  GROUP Exercise  PRE  SD Relaxation  SD  Scores  POST  (n=26)  M  M  Deviations of Expectancies  14.0  15.7  2.5  3.6  12.6  13.5  2.6  3.7  (n=25)  59  To  assess  maintenance  o f change o v e r  t h e 8-week  follow-up p e r i o d a post t o follow-up c o n t r a s t  was u s e d .  A  approached  time  (post  significance, interaction An post  was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t  follow-up  trait  t o suggest  summary  The g r o u p  of  the  indicated  time  p_<.292.  that  from  a n x i e t y c o n t i n u e d t o reduce,  d i d not that  by  F (2 , 47) = 1 . 26,  o f t h e means  change.  the groups  from p r e - t o p o s t t r e a t m e n t a  effect  <  self-efficacy  evidence  follow-up)  F(2,47)=3.49, 2 « ° 4 .  examination  to  while  to  There  changed  i s no  differently  o r a t 8-week f o l l o w - u p . F o r  MANOVA  and u n i v a r i a t e ANOVA's s e e  T a b l e 4. Coping. on  time  with  determine total  A  one-way MANOVA  preplanned  with repeated  contrasts  i f t h e combined g r o u p s  was  measures  performed  changed over  t i m e on  number o f c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s a n d i f t h e r e  differential  change f o r P - f o c u s e d  as h y p o t h e s i z e d . number  of  difference coping  coping  strategies  s c o r e between t h e  strategies).  For  contrast  on t i m e ,  effect,  F(2,45)=2.34,  total  number  difference coping pretest  findings  of  between  strategies  p_<. 1 1 .  the  SUM  and and  a  coping (total  DIFF  (the  E-focused  p r e - to posttreatment a  nonsignificant  This indicates  strategies number  d i d not  to posttreatment.  used)  indicated  coping  were  P-focused  the  was  and E - f o c u s e d  Dependent v a r i a b l e s  to  change  of  used P-  that the  and  the  and E - f o c u s e d  significantly  from  60 Table  4  Summary o f M u l t i v a r i a t e and U n i v a r i a t e  Effects  Multivariate  (F,g<)  d_f 2,47  Group Time(pre  f o r Outcome M e a s u r e s  Univariate Self-Efficacy  Anxiety  .055  .112  11.39  .001  .001  .001  1.76  .183  .094  .213  to follow-up)3.49  .038  .844  .011  .292  .133  .438  to post)  1.26  Coping 2,45  Time(post  Trait  .142  G r o u p by Time  Time(pre  (p_<)  2.04  G r o u p by Time Time(post  Results  to post)  P/E  a  SUM  DIFF  2.34  .108  .448  .034  to follow-up)1.74  .187  .066  .691  Exercise 2,47 Group  .055  .098  .016  20.48  .001  .001  .001  1.69  .196  .185  .069  t o f o l l o w - u p ) 4.32  .019  .831  .045  .282  .363  .701  G r o u p by Time  G r o u p by Time  a  Exday  3.08  Time(pre to post)  Time(post  Exefort  See t a b l e  1.30  3.  61  To  assess  8-week was  maintenance of c o p i n g  follow-up used.  This  F(2,45)=1.74, no  increase  nor  was  a  follow-up  as  and  association  Ancillary  by  Pearson-product  self-efficacy  (Exefort r=  there  scores  and  was  on  at  Exday)  -.017  and no  at  .039,  reliable  self-efficacy  time)  MANOVA  Exday  approached  significance  intensity).  at  follow-up.  at  measures,  improved  <  days)  and  group  main  £<.001.  their  ^-  T  h  s  exercise  effect The  significant  The  i  Exefort  p_<.06.  univariate  were s i g n i f i c a n t  001  3  of  contrast revealed a  2 '  X  E x e r c i s e was  (Exday, F ( 1 , 4 8 ) =41.82,  F(1,48)=22.87,  2  computed.  F ( 2 , 47 ) =3 . 08 ,  (pre to post)  dependent measures  in exercise pattern  The  F(2,47)=20.48,  f o r time  groups  was  (number  posttreatment  effect,  f o r change  groups a repeated  X  both  between  To t e s t  (minutes  Exefort,  f o r P- and  Measures  measured u s i n g  tests  strategies  and a e r o b i c e x e r c i s e a t 8-week  treatment  to  t h e r e was  coping  Predictor.  exercise  between  Exerc i se.  time  a  Therefore,  posttreatment  pre-  significant,  difference  showed no r e l a t i o n s h i p ,  respectively.  (group  of  significant  correlations  both  not  to follow-up  number  the  coping.  posttreatment  for  over  to follow-up contrast  was  From p o s t  i n the t o t a l  Self-Efficacy moment  a post  effect  p<.l9.  there  E-focused  period  behavior  f o r both  p_<.00l  and  i n d i c a t e s that from  pre- to  62  posttreatment. interaction  T h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t  for  the  pre-  F ( 2 , 4 7 ) = 1 . 6 9 , p_<.20. change the  large error  to posttreatment  Therefore  d i f f e r e n t l y over  time  v a r i a n c e may  g r o u p by  the  contrast,  groups  d i d not  1).  However,  (see Figure have  time  obscured  any  group  di f ferences. For  the post  significant  to follow-up  time  Univariate  effect,  analysis  significant,  Therefore, posttest of  the  an  group  was  the  of  was  was  not  by  time  group  the  £<.28.  means,  groups decreased  Questionnaires. "To  what  from  t h e number  reported  In r e s p o n s e extent  g o a l s ? " , the o v e r a l l 3.2  while  the  g r o u p was 2.6 on a 5 - p o i n t  did  have  you  program?",  mean scale  for  "somewhat" o r " v e r y  32%  made a s i m i l a r  For  the question  response  you d e a l w i t h  much  f o r the  "To what e x t e n t stress?",  of  you  the  ("somewhat"  maintained 66%  to  mean f o r t h e  On t h e 8-week f o l l o w - u p q u e s t i o n  exercise/relaxation  helped  both  question  extent  group  p_<.02.  Exday  Exefort  a  exercised.  "completely").  what  examination  your p e r s o n a l  relaxation to  from  and F o l l o w - u p  exercise  was  not s i g n i f i c a n t , F(2,47)=1.30,  posttreatment  achieve  However,  to follow-up  Post  that  Furthermore, was  days they  there  F ( 2 , 47) = 4.32,  revealed  p<.05.  significant, interaction  contrast  the  your exercise  so" while  relaxation  "To  only  group.  has j o g g i n g / r e l a x a t i o n 46%  of  the  exercise  63  Figure 1:  Pre, Post and Follow-up group means f o r Exercise Score (minutes X i n t e n s i t y ) .  Composite  64  group  and  28%  " m o d e r a t e l y " or  of  the  " v e r y much s o " .  relaxation  group s a i d  setting  established  58%  of  an the  exercise  group  rated  (48%)  contributing  exercise  posttreatment  relationships section.  of  percent  practise  good"  to  (56%)  helping  of  relaxation  (for exercise).  "feeling  responded the  due  to  compared The  exercise  and  them  to  "health"  maintain  an  program.  Correlation to  pattern  group  Sixty  they m a i n t a i n e d  group a l s o as  relaxation  See  Matrix. measures  which w i l l Table  5.  A c o r r e l a t i o n matrix will be  be  examined  used  to  i n the  for  pre-  quantify discussion  Table C o r r e l a t i o n s of Correlations, _ . Dependent Variables and Other Selected Factors ,  PROBI EMOTt PR082 EMOT2 ACE MST1 WSTt SELFEFFI TRAIT 1 EXDAY1 EXEFORT1 EXPECTt HST2 WSTI S1LFEFF2 TRAIT2 EXOAV2 EXEF0RT2 EXPECT2 TOTGOAL  119 120 121 122 31 32 33 34 35 36 131 39 70 71 ' 72 73 74 132 77 134  1.0000 •O.OS42 0.3336  0.04 ta -0.1450 O.OB99 0.3316 O.J5'0 -0.0756 0 . 1375 0.0784 0.2860 -0.0248 0 . 1504 0.2832 -0.1399 0 . 12 16 0.147 I 0.0301 0.1511 EXEFORTI  EXEFORT1 EXPECTt HST2 WST2 SELFEFF2 TRAIT2 EXDAY2 EXEF0RT2 EXPECT2 TOTGOAL  131 39 70 71 72 73 74 132 77 134  1.0000 -0.0749 -0.0882 -0.0985 -O.1467 -0.0199 - 0 . 1451 0.6232 0.0575 0.0423  a c e  PR082  PROP I  1.0000 -O.1834 0.7192 - 0 . 1308 -0.3040 -0.5431 -0.3346 0.5508 -0.1244 -0.0733 -0.0658 -0.0037 -0.2652 -0.2557 0.2793 -0.2570 -0.1462 0.0671 0.0066  EXPECT I  1.0000 0.0897 0.0350 0.2882 •0.0460 -0.1197 -0.0047 0.2640 0.2702  1. oooo - 0 . ,0351 - 0 .2528 0 .2424 0 . 1532 0 .2556 - 0 .2315 - 0 .0223 0 .0524 0 .0861 0 .0CI4 - 0 .1654 0.. 1790 - 0 .2039 0., 1498 0.. 1677 0 .2516 0,.3328  HST2  1.0000 0.3277 .5701 .5718 .0710 .0094 .2 114 . 1849  1.0000 -0.0495 -0.3108 •0.4286 -0-3B9S 0.4499 -0-2092 -0.0598 -00159 -0.2310 -0.3B92 -0.4846 0.3200 -0.3055 -0.2337 -0.0019 -0.I3°3  WST 2  1 .0000 0.46GB  •0.4621 0.1859 -O.O077 0.0004 0.0660  1 .0000 0,.0003 0 . 1899 - 0 . . 1358 0 . 1250 0 . 1913 - 0 .0573 0 .0157 - 0 .2845 0 .0023 -o. ,2483 0 .2276 0,.0628 - 0 , .0226 - 0 , .3488 - 0 . .3960 SELFEFF2  1.0000 -0.5761 0.1332 -0.0539 O. 1422 0.2466  | | j n  W S T  1 .oooo 0.4270 0.3868 -0.4576 0.0561 0 . '489 0.1637 0.3S10 0.3399 0.4550 -0.4812 0.0858 O. 1245 O . 12B8 0.0463  TRAIT2  1.0000 -O.1782 -0.0727 -O.1194 -0.1801  1.0000 0.5649 -0.4124 -0.1451 -O.1534 0.1805 0.2488 0.5432 0.4778 -0.337 1 0.2532 -O.1548 •0. M S 2 0.0364  EXDAV2  1.0000 0.0335 -0.2017 -0.0S60  SELFEFFI  1..0000 - 0 . .5966 • - 0 , . 1707 - 0 . 1477 0.,2532 0..3555 0..3460 0..7863 - 0 . ,547 1 0..3105 0. 0339 0. 0521 0. 1 127 EXEF0RT2  1.0000 0.1036 •0.0169  TRAIT I  1 oooo 0,.2343 0.. 1217 - 0 . . 1329 - 0 , .33B7 - 0 , .2787 - 0 4933 0 .707 8 - 0 . .3630 - 0 . , 1470 - 0 . .C825 - 0 , ,0278  EXDAY1  1.0000 0.64 13 0.0542 -0.0339 -0.1716 -0.2032 O. 1829 -0.0662 0.5138 -0.0006 -0.0589  EXPECTS  1.0000 0.6078  1.0000  66  Di s c u s s i o n The  results  aerobic  of t h i s  exercise  study  and  anxiety  posttreatment women.  be  the t o t a l that  positively  decreased changes  r e l a t e d to jogging  anxiety were  follow-up. Jasnoski that  and i n c r e a s e d  These  or  findings  a n d Holmes  in  differences  as:  (a) p a r t i c i p a n t s g a i n i n g the  relaxation), group groups  technique (b)  support. were  (deVries,  In  taught  used  responses;  self-efficacy  and these  at  8-week  t o s t u d i e s by  (1984)  Since  who  found  increased  there  self-efficacy  a sense of mastery jogging  or  addition,  while  such (i.e.,  progressive  skill, both  a form o f m u s c l e t e n s i o n 1938),  were  may have  i n each group  l e a r n i n g a new c o p i n g  1968; J a c o b s o n ,  they  similar  components  of  would  was n o t e v i d e n t .  anxiety.  increased  It  follow-up  e x e r c i s e program  been  learning  at  improved  between g r o u p s , by common  strategies.  are similar  an  and d e c r e a s e d  significantly  behavior  (1981) a n d Long  participation  at  working  at posttreatment  generated  maintained  self-efficacy  that  coping  self-efficacy  treatments  sedentary  treatment  the e x e r c i s e group but t h i s Both  no  number o f  reducing  self-efficacy  for  neither  8-week  relaxation  significantly  and 8 weeks l a t e r  expected  for  in  increasing  Unexpectedly,  increased was  and  that  progressive  interventions are effective trait  indicate  and (c)  treatment reduction  subjects self-reported  jogging/relaxation  (Exercise  68%,  67  Relaxation control to  72%)  as a d i s t r a c t i o n  (Exercise  findings  by  R e l a x a t i o n 48%)  Long  (1984). resulting  be  predicted  from  on  only  Therefore, specific  which  Arnkoff  change p r o c e s s e s  focus  t o g a i n a sense  72%,  that  procedures.  and  from  is similar  (1986)  suggests  a treatment  the  content  of  future  studies  may  treatment  components  of  cannot  treatment want  to  in r e l a t i o n  to  self-ef f icacy. The  total  significantly assessment  number increase.  of c o p i n g as  a recent s t r e s s f u l coped  coping  generalize forget  coping  stressful of  any  work  stressor.  identified stressful  t h e WCC  was  and  19%  not  e v i d e n t from  on  learning  the may  types  specifying to  percent  relationships  what was  results.  specific  as a s t r e s s o r  that  about  that  than  other  to  be  s u b j e c t s were f r e e  identified  a  would  something  findings  workload  they  (e.g., t r i e d  changed  Rather  the  w i t h how  or  (1986b) f o u n d  depending  to  to d e s c r i b e  that  measure  Thirty-eight  interpersonal  Folkman e t a l . varied  on  stressor,  identified  d i d not  (exercise/relaxation)  work e n c o u n t e r s .  type  due  respond  increased only within  the  subjects  be  expected  e x p l a n a t i o n f o r these strategies  strategies  may  then  I t was  thing;  however, t h i s  One  and  strategy  t h e whole  myself)  This  event  t o items  coping  s u b j e c t s were a s k e d  w i t h the event.  new  of  of  at work  coping  a t s t a k e and  identify of while work  the 43% as  stresses. strategies  what o p t i o n s  68  the  individual  had  consider  looking  stressors  because  tapped  in t h i s  stressor  at  study  notion coping  (1986b).  P-focused  (Latack,  has  were  taught  coping, p a r t i c u l a r l y  and  the concept  scored to  appears  h i g h on  use  p_<. 01 ) .  more  The  but  at  a  at  to lower  allows  individuals  change  the  strategy  t o be  (exercise,  more  P-focused  between  coping  women  pretreatment  and  was  E-focused -.39,  (r=.45,  enhanced  between coping at  p_<. 01 ) ;  related  lower  to a higher (r_  =  -.49,  self-efficacy  (r_ = -.58, concerned  who  appeared  relationship  posttreatment  less  in  subjects  Initially,  (r = -.34,  anxiety  pre-  situation.  negative  that  trait  coping  coping at pretreatment  c o p i n g at  of  from  the  facilitated  at posttreatment  related  P-focused  since  coping  pretreatment  notion  type  strategies did  hypothesized  self-efficacy.  was  of E - f o c u s e d  P_<.01).  time  t o be a r e l a t i o n s h i p  P-focused  the  coping  i n t h e work  at posttreatment  self-efficacy use  have  strategies  Folkman e t a l .  over  self-efficacy  There  self-efficacy p r e - and  of  by  Interestingly,  r e l a x a t i o n ) w h i c h may  There  coping  work  r e p o r t e d by  E-focused  E-focused  of  facilitating  seems r e a s o n a b l e  a new  types  should  coping  i n the d i r e c t i o n  coping  studies  1986).  been  and  posttreatment.  P-focused  that  E-focused  change s i g n i f i c a n t l y  means d i f f e r e d  different  were c o n f o u n d e d  of  P-focused  to  the  Future  i t is possible  identified  The  not  for coping.  p_<.0l), over  is and  emotions  69  and  more P - f o c u s e d may Self-efficacy  posttreatment  be  increased  and  was  However, s e l f - e f f i c a c y not  predict  aerobic in  other et  be  good p r e d i c t o r  during  a l . , 1984)  and  however,  pretreatment after  a  behavior  a  This  of  an  specific  program.  a  specific this  linear  specific  performance  significant with  the  longer  measure was  follow-up  general  self-efficacy in a  Despite  fact  were  instructed  not  both  the  relaxation their  that  exercise  at  during  or  general  not  to: or  related lack (a)  (b)  addition,  to of  for  contrary in  a a  problems  a need  always  a to  perceived lead  to  behavior. the  relaxation  t o change t h e i r and  measure  However, a  The  not  studies  pretreatment  p e r h a p s a change  does  specific  the  In  walking  showed  was  due  exercise,  period.  (1977) t h e o r y ,  persistence  increased  of  be  to  (Exefort)  (jogging).  r e l a t i o n s h i p may measurement  Bandura's  u s e d but  and  behavior  .03).  1981;  found  These  exercise  r e l a t i o n s h i p (r_ =  self-efficacy  was  study,  the  findings  Lichtenstein,  self-efficacy  In  did  for  to  smoking a b s t i n e n c e  self-efficacy/posttreatment no  i s contrary  to  follow-up.  follow-up  intervention.  to p r e d i c t  from p r e -  posttreatment  at  &  study.  at  where s e l f - e f f i c a c y  after  used  at  (Condiotte  Kaplan a  maintained  group.  studies  further  significantly  assessed  exercise  exercise  w o r t h y of  participants  exercise  the  exercise  over  time.  The  patterns  participants reason  both  70  groups  increased  their  exercise  may  p r o g r a m s s t a r t i n g i n snowy w e a t h e r the  spring  walk/jog  which c o u l d  due t o s e a s o n a l  interview  introducing  stress-management the  relaxation  study  both  suggested  that  Holmes, related  t e s t was  also  influenced Recall  be  improvement  may  it  was  a l . , 1981;  McCann per  &  se was  self-efficacy.  "non-specific  Furthermore,  factors"  the  7-Day  n o t be s e n s i t i v e enough t o measure  increase  the time  that  (1984)  reactive.  increased  change.  in exercise  individuals  and  as a  some o f  In L o n g ' s MV02  to  initial  exercise  participation  and  possible  behavioral  measure  et  that  the  have e n c o u r a g e d  their  (Jasnoski  found  of  exercise.  improved  to less tension  may  assess  to  the bike  studies  1984)  notion  into  a l l subjects  c h a n g e s , and (b) the  group  and c o n t i n u i n g  influenced  t e c h n i q u e may  groups  Other  It  have  be due t o : (a) t h e  accurately. their  and  effort  For  aerobic more  example,  exercise  they  realistically  as may than  nonexerc i s e r s . While indicate at  both groups that  follow-up  trend  the e x e r c i s e  while  (see F i g u r e  Exday.  increased  their  and  decreased  relaxation  1).  group continued  A similar pattern 36%  exercise,  group  in exercise  the  their 24%  of  of  the  the  downward  was  found f o r  exercise  subjects  48% m a i n t a i n e d exercise  means  to exercise  t h e r e l a x a t i o n g r o u p had a  At f o l l o w - u p ,  16%  improved  their  while  subjects  exercise for  the  i m p r o v e d , 24%  71  maintained  their  decreased  their  Although suggest  exercise there  that a  data  or  relaxation  the  relaxation  the  with  as  relaxation  their  want  their  group,  working  from  a  open-ended to  indicate  a  as  more  progressive For  responded  (somewhat to  to  76%  from  that often)  of  However, 56%  changed  the of  the  negative  to  compared t o  tended  program  to:  25%  (46%).  of  the  contribute feeling (50%),  subjects a pattern  relaxation.  in  good and, the  of p r a c t i s e  Future  studies  findings.  noted  that  this  study  are  to h e l p  (a)  For  establishing  these  to  exercise pattern  be  women who  treatment  them  jogging  them m a i n t a i n  should  results  to  intervention.  subjects  joggers  to explore  It  as  to  (for relaxation).  health  helped  superior  perceived  compared  (b) e s t a b l i s h i n g an  relaxation  may  of  better  (60%)  was  helped  of  evidence  seem  satisfactory  mood  a result  group  maintenance  (c)  subjects  stress  Additionally,  (54%),  the  subjects  exercise).  is  group at p o s t t r e a t m e n t .  said  the  treatment,  exercise  program  better  positive  treatment  as  of  statistical  treatment  just  8 1 % of  joggers  no  stress-management  jogging  cope  from  jogging  satisfactory  example,  is  36%  d i d no  relaxation  self-report the  and  (16%  jogging  progressive  that  exercise  volunteered  for  them cope w i t h  generalizability limited a  to  of  sedentary  stress-management  work s t r e s s .  72  In  summary, the  exercise  was  reducing  as  sedentary  data  were  on  future  s t u d i e s may  treatments  specifically,  produced  situations)  subject's  coping  s u c h as  electromyogram  objective The  behavior  this  coped  notion  study with  weeks. only  behavioral  be  effects.  (e.g., used  while  More  observation  to  observe  in a  p h y s i o l o g i c a l measures  (EMG)  may  of c o p i n g  as  treatments  a work-related  It i s p o s s i b l e that within  tapped  who  feel  that  may  add  to  an  be  specific  used  as  in this  study,  to  coping of  identify  an  the  they  past  two  changed  Furthermore, although  (e.g., it  was  the i n d i v i d u a l s  s u c c e s s f u l l y d e a l t with  the  theoretical 1984).  how  work s t r e s s o r s  identifying  for  research.  strategies  they  (Menaghan & M e r v e s ,  measure  further  s t r e s s o r during  types  workload).  outcome  needs  s u b j e c t s were a s k e d  interpersonal, not  For  i n d i c a t o r of r e l a x a t i o n .  stress-management In  may  1980).  both  desired  measures  contrived  an  (Kazdin,  specific  v a r i a b l e s to determine i f  the  behavioral  self-report  more  incorporate  dependent  in  outcome whereas a  provided  data  aerobic  self-efficacy  However, o n l y  have  outcome  that  relaxation  increasing general  a p p r o a c h may  physiological  the  progressive  w o r k i n g women.  information example,  and  as  demonstrated  u s e d t o measure t r e a t m e n t  multimodal  and  effective  anxiety  for  results  the  stressor  knowledge base of  coping  73  In a d d i t i o n , r e s e a r c h e r s may want to  explore  r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f - e f f i c a c y  (as a general  and E - f o c u s e d coping ( i n s p e c i f i c  situations).  is  some i n d i c a t i o n that  is negatively study the  of  related  this  for working women to  low  coping i n the work According  self-efficacy Further  do women  consistently  to  use E - f o c u s e d  Bandura  (1977)  an  individual's  may be i n c r e a s e d due to s u b j e c t s  teaching s u b j e c t s  gaining  t h e r a p i s t modeling, p e r s u a s i o n , and to  control  physiological  arousal.  t h i s , study employed a l l of these methods  researchers approach  to  self-efficacy In  may  who  situation).  a sense of mastery,  Since  There  coping.  in coping ( i . e . ,  on s e l f - e f f i c a c y  self-efficacy  trait)  r e l a t i o n s h i p may p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on  issue of c o n s i s t e n c y  score  E-focused  the  want  more  to  fully  use  component  understand  change  (Kazdin,  conclusion,  aerobic  v i a b l e stress-management  a  the  future  analysis  reason  for  1980). exercise  intervention  should continue to explore t h i s area of  appears to be a and  researchers  research.  74  References American  College  Guidelines  f o r graded  prescription Arnkoff,  of  D.B.  (1986).  L.,  behavioral brief  A comparison  Cognitive  &  and e x e r c i s e Kimpton.  of t h e c o p i n g and of  cognitive  Therapy  Hammen, C.  coping  report.  and  Research,  responses Cognitive  (1984). of  men  Therapy  Cognitive vs and  women:  A  and  Research,  85-89.  Astrand,  P.O., & R o d a h l ,  physiology. Bandura,  K.  (1977).  Textbook  o f work  New York:McGraw-Hi11 Book Co.  A.  theory  Bandura,  testing  (1980).  147-158.  Astor-Dubin,  84,  exercise  components  restructuring.  8(1),  Medicine.  (2nd. e d . ) , London, E n g r H e n r y  restructuring  lp_(2),  Sports  (1977).  Self-efficacy:Toward  of b e h a v i o r a l  change.  a unifying  Psychological  Review,  191-215. A.  Advanced Barrios,  (1978).  Behavior Res.  B.A.,  skills critical  Reflections  &  training review.  Therapy,  Shigetomi,  on  self-efficacy.  1, 237-269.  C.C.  (1979).  Coping  f o r t h e management o f a n x i e t y : A Behavior Therapy,  10, 491-522.  75  Beck, A.T., Ward, C.E., Erbaugh,  J.  Mendelson,  (1961).  depression.  An  Archives  of  M.,  Mock,  inventory General  J.,  &  f o r measuring  Psychiatry,  4,  561-571. Berstein,  D.A.,  & B o r k o v e c , T.D.  relaxation  training.  (1973).  Champaign,  Progressive  111.:  Research  Press. Billings,  A.G.,  & Moos, R.H.  r e s p o n s e s and s o c i a l stress  of  Medicine, Blair,  life  (1981).  resources  events.  in  Role  of  coping  attenuating  Journal  of  the  Behavioral  4 ( 2 ) , 139-157.  S.N.  (1984).  How  physical  fitness.  (Eds.),  Behavioral  enhancement  to assess In,  J.D.  health:  and d i s e a s e  e x e r c i s e h a b i t s and Matarazzo  A  handbook  prevention.  New  et a l . of h e a l t h York:John  Wiley. Blanchard,  E.B., A n d r a s i k ,  Biofeedback tension  and  relaxation  (1973). and  sports,  5,  93-103.  T.D.,  &  investigation  3,  methods.  Fowles, of  the  B.V.  the  Belar.  (1980).  treatment  of  Journal  of  A  on  227-232.  Perceived  "history"  Borkovec,  in  headaches: A r e p l y to  Behavioral Medicine, B o r g , G.A.  F., & S i l v e r ,  exertion: Medicine  D.C. effects  note  and s c i e n c e i n  (1973). of  Controlled progressive  76  relaxation  and  Journal  Abnormal P s y c h o l o g y ,  of  Borkovec,  hypnotic  T.D.,  &  relaxation 82,  O'Brien,  and  analogue  outcome r e s e a r c h .  R.M.  Eisler,  &  P.M.  Behavior M o d i f i c a t i o n York:Academic Borkovec,  T.D.,  effects  D.  of  Progress 1,  pp.  three  42,  17,  New  to  the  The  In  physiological  B.A.  Behavior  Maher research  Dissertation  (Vol.  of  physiological University  Abstracts  a  (Ed.),  effects  A  dissertation,  as  Press.  differential  techniques:  (Doctoral  1980).  New  119-126.  York: Academic  (1980).  comparison  in  Critical  relaxation.  personality.  relaxation  Iowa,  133-172).  in experimental personality  A.  Hersen,  Repression-sensitization  334-349).  Cangelosi,  pp.  in  Progress  (1979).  related  Therapy,  (1964).  dimension  issues  In M.  (Eds.),  J.K.  progressive  R e s e a r c h and Bryne,  Sides,  variables  of  (1976).  Press. &  procedural  3,  153-158.  behavior  Miller (Vol.  insomnia.  G.T.  Methodological therapy  target  on  of  International,  418B.  Chisholm, Gruber, British Condiotte,  D.,  Collins,  N.  (1975).  Columbia M.M.,  M.,  Kulak,  L.,  Par-Q  validation  Department &  of  D a v e n p o r t , B.,  &  report.  Health.  Lichtenstein,  E.  (1981).  77  Self-efficacy programs. Psychology, Cooper,  of  Journal  of  (1968).  intake.  Association, deVries,  relapse  H.A.  Dishman,  adherence.  Doyne,  Quest,  33(2), &  events.  Behavior Therapy,  Social  and  & Beutler, for  Taylor,  29,  (1983).  depression  in  14, 434-440. activity  Scandinavian  (Suppl)  C.B.,  (1974).  L.E.  stress reactions  reactions.  exercise  Wiley.  The e f f e c t of p h y s i c a l  Medicine,  E w a r t , C.K.,  1-11.  B.P.  York:John  as a treatment  reactions,  physiological  8,  potential  166-180.  New  women.  emotional  Medical  term e f f e c t s  psychology  Dohrenwend,  exercise  (1982).  maximal  American  Medicine,  Health  E . J . , C h a m b l e s s , D.L.,  R.  Clinical  r e s t i n g muscle a c t i o n  (1982).  life  of  Immediate and l o n g  Aerobic  Eide,  and  means of a s s e s s i n g  of Sports  B.S.,  Stressful  cessation  201-204.  upon  Journal  Dohrenwend,  A  (1968).  R.K.  smoking  Consulting  Journal  203,  exercise  level.  in  49, 648-658.  K.H.  oxygen  and  on  and r e l a t e d Journal  of  103-107.  Reese, L.B., & Debusk,  R.F.  (1984).  E f f e c t s of e a r l y p o s t m y o c a r d i a l  infarction  exercise  t e s t i n g on s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n and  subsequent  physical 51,  activity.  1076-1080.  American J o u r n a l  of  Cardiology  78  Felton,  B . J . , & R e v e n s o n , T.A.  chronic and  illness:  the  and Finn,  Clinical J.  Psychology,  Social  Journal  52(3),  46(4), Folkins,  C.H., L y n c h ,  fitness.  to  &  Archives  training  coping  of  of  341-349. (1984). study  Toward an of  Social  stress.  Psychology,  a  M.M.  function  Physical  and mental  (1981).  health.  (1972).  of p h y s i c a l  Medicine  and  Physical  American  fitness  Psychologist,  373-389. S.,  & L a z a r u s , R.S.  i n a middle  aged  be  a three  process: stages  (1980).  community  An a n a l y s i s o f  sample.  Journal  B e h a v i o r , 2 ( 1 ) , 219-239.  F o l k m a n , S., & L a z a r u s , R.S.  during  Journal  53, 503-508.  of H e a l t h a n d S o c i a l  must  The  Gardner,  as  C.H., & Sime, W.E.  Folkman,  the  and  S.,  fitness  Rehabilitation,  55(4),  of Consulting  939-949.  Psychological  Folkins,  on  and c o p i n g b e h a v i o r o f  S o c i a l Work, 6 6 ( 6 ) ,  Personality  with  343-353.  Casework:  approach  of  strategies  Journal  F l e m i n g , R., Baum, A., & S i n g e r , J . integrative  Coping  controllability  coping  The s t r e s s e s  women.  Contemporary  of  adjustment.  (1985).  battered  A study of i l l n e s s  influence  psychological  (1984).  (1985).  I f i t changes i t  study  of emotion  of  college  a  and c o p i n g  examination.  79  Journal 48(1),  of  Personality  L a z a r u s , R.S.,  (1986a).  Appraisal,  psychological Social  S.,  and  A.,  M.,  behavior  &  and  R.T.,  J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y  and  571-579. Dunkel-Schetter, (1986b).  &  C,  Dynamics o f  appraisal,  coping,  J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y  50(5),  R.H.  heart.  Fremouw,  and  992-1003.  Rosenman,  your  A. and  R.S.,  outcomes.  & DeLongis, status,  & Gruen, R.J.  Psychology,  Friedman,  Gross,  Psychology,  health  encounter: Cognitive  encounter  Social  coping,  50(3),  Lazarus,  stressful  Gruen, R.J.,  symptoms.  Psychology,  DeLongis, a  Social  150-170.  F o l k m a n , S.,  Folkman,  and  New  (1974).  Type  A  York:Fawcett.  W.J.  (1982).  restructuring  and  progressive  treatment  of  empirical  subjects.  Cognitive  Therapy  &  Borkovec,  relaxation  subtypes and  Cognitive  of  for  speech-anxious  Research,  6  (4),  429-436. Heidi,  F.J.,  Relaxation-induced anxiety-enhancement Journal  T.D.  anxiety: due  of C o n s u l t i n g  to  and  Paradoxical  relaxation  Clinical  (1983).  training.  Psychology,  51,  171-182. Hilyer,  J.C.,  systematic  &  Mitchell,  physical  W.  fitness  (1979). training  Effect  combined  of with  80  counselling  on  students.  Journal  26(5), Holahan,  the  C.J.,  & Moos,  Personality,  stress  resistance.  Social  Jasnoski,  M.L.,  initial  in  college  Psychology,  of  Life  family of  stress support  Personality  Progressive Chicago  Journal  and in and  739-747.  Press.  aerobic  fitness of  Relaxation.  (1981).  D.S.  fitness,  Influence training  on  of and  personality  Psychosomatic  Research,  553-556. M.L.,  Holmes,  (1981).  Exercise,  changes  in  D.S.,  Solomon,  changes  Journal  of  S.,  in aerobic  self-perceptions:  investigation.  An  Research  &  Aguiar,  capacity,  C. and  experimental in  Personality,  460-466. R.M.,  Atkins,  Specific  efficacy  compliance Psychology, Kazdin,  and  Journal  aerobic  functioning.  Kaplan,  coping  & Holmes,  aerobic  changes  (1985).  R.H.  (1938).  E.  Chicago:University  JJ5,  Counselling  49(3),  Psychology,  Jacobson,  Jasnoski,  of  of  427-436.  health:  25,  self-concept  A.E.,  behavior  C.J.,  patients  3(3),  223-242.  Wilson,  therapyr  Reinsch  expectations  in  &  &  G.T.  Issues,  S.  (1984).  mediate  exercise  COPD.  Health  with  (1978). evidence,  Evaluation and  of  research  81  strategies. K a z d i n , A.E. New  Cambridge, M a s s : B a l l e n g e r  (1980).  York:Harper  Langner,  T.S.  score  &  of  in c l i n i c a l  Co.  psychology.  Row.  (1962).  A  twenty-two  psychiatric  impairment. 3,  Research  Pub.  item s c r e e n i n g  symptoms  J o u r n a l of H e a l t h and  indicating  Social  Behavior  job s t r e s s :  Measures  269-276.  Latack,  J.C.  and  (1986).  future  Coping  directions  with for  scale  development.  9  Journal Lazarus,  of A p p l i e d  R.S.  (1985).  denial.  In  A.  Stress  and  Univ.  Press:New  Lazarus,  &  appraisal,  (1980). as  C.  a  (1982).  Sport Lee,  C.  and  R.S.  benefits  Lazarus  anthology  S. New  Run  154-173).  (1984).  Stress,  means  of  mind:  alleviating Journal  of  Aerobic  a n x i e t y and Behavioral  126-139. as  a  predictor  in competitive gymnastics.  Psychology,  e x p e c t a t i o n s as  (Eds.),  (pp.  your  Self-efficacy  (1984).  of  York:Springer.  for  Canadian  12(2),  performance  &  377-385.  York.  coping.  depression.  Lee,  Monat An  71(3),  costs  Folkman,  and  L e d w i d g e , B.  Science,  The  coping:  R.S.,  exercise  Psychology,  4,  of  J o u r n a l of  405-409.  Efficacy predictors  e x p e c t a t i o n s and of  performance  outcome in  a  82  snake-handling Research, Lehrer,  P.M.,  & Woolfolk,  empirical  Cognitive  stress they  comparative  Woolfolk of  &  P.M.  stress  York:GuiIford Press.  conditioning  comparison  interventions.  of  and  stress  Therapy  stress  management  and  Research,  517-541.  Long, B.C.  (1985).  15-month stress  Stress-management  follow-up  inoculation  Research, Long, B.C.,  of  interventions: conditioning  Cognitive  A  and  Therapy  and  9 ( 4 ) , 471-478. (1986).  Enhancing  physical  i n s e d e n t a r y women: I n f o r m a t i o n , l o c u s o f  control,  and  Psychology, J.E.,  appeals  Journal  of  Sport  (1983).  Protection  8-24.  Rogers,  and  Experimental  attitudes.  8(1), &  motivation  J.E.,  aerobic  training.  & Haney, C . J .  activity  Martin,  and  or do  practice  New  Aerobic  A  Are  of t h e  R.L.  and  (pp. 4 0 4 - 4 6 4 ) .  inoculation:  fear  In  Principles  (1984).  (1984).  A review  literature.  management  Maddux,  Therapy  interchangeable,  effects?:  (Eds.),  8(5),  R.L.  techniques  have s p e c i f i c  L o n g , B.C.  Cognitive  8 ( 5 ) , 509-516.  reduction  Lehrer  task.  R.W.  self-efficacy: and  Social  & Dubbert,  attitude  change.  Psychology, P.M.  A revised  19,  (1982).  t h e o r y of  Journal  of  469-479. Exercise  and  83  health:  The  Update,  4,  Martin,  J.E.,  adherence problem.  Behavioral  Medicine  16-24. & D u b b e r t , P.M.  exercise.  E x e r c i s e and  (1985).  Adherence  to  Sciences  Reviews,  13,  reduction  research  and  Sport  137-167. Mathews,  A.M.  (1978).  clinical  Fear  phobias.  Psychological  Bulletin,  85,  390-404. M c C u b b i n , H.I.,  Larsen,  F-Copes: et  al.  MN:U  R.S.,  family coping (Eds.),  of M i n n .  McCann, L.,  &  aerobic  Olson,  D.H.  strategies.  Family  (1982).  In D.H.  inventories.  St.  Olson Paul,  Press.  Holmes, exercise  Personality  &  D.S.  (1984).  on  and  Influence  of  Journal  of  depression.  Social  Psychology,  46(5) ,  1 142-1147. Meichenbaum, D., reduction  & J a r e m k o , M.  and  Menaghan, E.G.,  25,  prevention.  New  (1983).  (1984).  problems:  limits  Journal  the  of H e a l t h  Stress  York:Plenum.  & M e r v e s , E.S.  occupational efforts.  (Eds.)  and  Coping  with  of  individual  Social  Behavior,  406-423.  Mihevic,  P.M.  exercise. Mitchell,  C,  (1982). Quest, &  33(2),  Stuart,  Anxiety,  depression  and  140-153. R.B.  (1984).  Effect  of  84  self-efficacy Journal  of  on d r o p o u t  from  Consulting  and  obesity  treatment.  Clinical  Psychology,  52(6) , 1100-1101. Moos,  R.H.,  & Billings,  A.G.  (1982).  Conceptualizing  and m e a s u r i n g c o p i n g r e s o u r c e s and L.  Goldberger  stress;  New  (1981).  physical  activity.  (Eds.),  Exercise,  (1984).  In F . J .  C.  Locus  Journal  Personality  benefits  N a g l e & H.J. disease  (pp.  of  Montoye 299-314).  of  coping  in and  control,  cognitive  stressful  episodes.  Social  Psychology,  655-668.  Patterson,  J.M.,  roles  and  Family, Pearlin,  (pp.  Thomas.  and  46(3),  Handbook of  aspects  Psychological  appraisal, of  clinical  h e a l t h and  Springfield:Charles K.R.  and  (Eds.),  In  York:MacMillan.  W.P.  Parkes,  Breznitz  theoretical  212-230). Morgan,  & S.  processes.  coping.  McCubbin,  coping.  46,  L.,  &  H.I.  Journal  (1984).  of  Gender  Marriage  and  the  95-104.  & S c h o o l e r , C. J o u r n a l of  (1978).  Health  and  The  structure  Social  of  Behavior,  j_9( 1 ) , 2-21 . Redmond, D.P., A.P. response  G a y l o r , M.S.,  (1974). to verbal  Blood  M c D o n a l d , R.H., pressure  instructions  and  and  & Shapiro, heart  relaxation  rate in  85  hypertension. Reed,  M.,  &  Saslow,  relaxation anxiety, Journal Sallis,  Psychosomatic  general  J.F.,  the  M.,  &  of  Psychological Sherer,  (1982).  A.D.,  D.J.  for  Psychology  Review,  Spielberger,  C,  assessment  Jacobs,  Reports,  L.H.,  R.J.  &  scale:  of  Construct scale.  An  B.,  Rogers,  R.W.  C o n s t r u c t i o n and 51, 663-671.  McGowan,  (1985).  depression:  C.R.,  Kupfer,  Exercise update.  as  a  Clinical  5, 553-568.  Gorsuch,  R.,  & L u s h e n e , R.  f o r the S t a t e - T r a i t  Palo A l t o .  CA:Consulting  A.A., & N e a l e ,  Journal  Mercandante,  B.,  STAI manual  Stone,  methodology  53, 899-902. J.E.,  Epstein,  treatment  Fortmann,  self-efficacy  Psychological  & Robertson,  P.D.,  (1983).  The s e l f - e f f i c a c y  validation. Simons,  S.,  36, 683-690.  American  the  Maddux,  Prentice-Dunn,  test  & P a f f e n b a r g e r , R.S.  C.H.  Reports,  M.,  on  of  91-106.  Adams,  validation  S.N.,  project.  121(1),  effects  l o c u s of c o n t r o l .  Wood,  activity  five-city  Epidemiology, Sherer,  W.L.,  T., B l a i r ,  Physical  The  and  Psychology,  Haskell,  36, 285-297.  and EMG b i o f e e d b a c k  anxiety,  of C l i n i c a l  (1985).  (1980).  instructions  S.P., R o g e r s ,  in  C.  Medicine,  J.M.  Anxiety  (1970).  Inventory.  Psychologist Press.  (1984).  A new  measure  of  86  daily  coping:  Development  Journal  of  46(4),  892-906.  Strecher,  Personality  V.J.,  I.M.  self-efficacy  Taylor,  C.B.,  &  activity  &  Ascher,  The  13(1),  73-91.  R.,  W.L.  (1984). compared  L.M.  Journal  Consulting  G.E.  Vitaliano,  P.P.,  Walk,  R.D.  Journal  of  Controlled  relaxation,  stimulus  therapies and  for  Clinical  Adaption  to  life.  Brown.  The  psychometric  Research, (1956).  fear-invoking  direct  500-508.  (1985).  and  Behavioral  of  Russo, J . , C a r r ,  Becker, J . Revision  progressive  (1977).  Boston:Little,  a  (1979).  intention  Valliant,  K.,  818-824.  paradoxical  47,  change.  Seven-day  to  American  control,  Psychology,  of  Iaffaldano,  of  insomnia.  &  role  behavior  comparison and  M.H.,  health  physical activity. 120(6),  Psychology,  Berra,  self-report  Epidemiology, R.M.  K.,  Haskell,  and  measure of  Turner,  Quarterly,  results.  Becker,  (1986).  Coffey,  C a s e y , K.,  Social  B.M.,  in achieving  Education  preliminary  and  DeVellis,  Rosenstock,  Health  and  20,  J.E.,  Ways of  Coping  properties.  &  Checklist: Multivariate  3-26.  Self-ratings  situation.  M a i u r o , R.D.,  Journal  of of  fear Abnormal  in  a and  87  Social Wallace,  Psychology, J.P.,  Observed  52,  171-178.  M c K e n z i e , T.L.,  vs.  recalled  exercise  validation  of a seven day  11  years  to  13  Exercise Ward, A., of  and  healthy  men  4,  The  rate  performance  a  Woolfolk,  R.L.,  practice  class  University Abstracts  & Lehrer, of  For  patterns  i n an  of  effects  meditation  Dissertation  Adherence enrolled  content-specific  dissertation,  f o r boys  Quarterly  Journal  heart  in  A  adult  Cardiac  143-152.  (1978).  relaxation,  behavior:  161-165.  women  program.  Rehabilitation, D.T.  Research  (1984).  and  (1985).  exercise recall  56(2),  & Morgan, W.P.  exercise  Wood,  old.  Sport,  & Nader, P.R.  of  progressive  biofeedback,  and  on  and  anxiety  situation of  Toledo,  I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 39, P.M.  (1984).  s t r e s s management.  New  (Doctoral 1978). 3458A.  Principles  and  York:GuiIford  Press. Woolfolk, A.J. and  R.L.,  Lehrer,  (1982).  Effects  meditation  manifestations and  Therapy,  P.M.,  on  of d a i l y  20,  of  McCann, B.S., progressive cognitive  stress.  461-468.  & Rooney, relaxation  and  somatic  Behavior  Research  88,  Young,  R.J.,  &  differences physical 513-519.  Ismail, of  adult  A.H.  (1976).  men  f i t n e s s program.  before  Personality and  after  Research Quarterly,  a 47,  APPENDIX A  lephone  Screening  Interview Informed  Consent  90  TELEPHONE PROTOCOL P a r t i c i p a n t s l e f t t h e i r t e l e p h o n e number and name on a t e l e p h o n e a n s w e r i n g s e r v i c e i n t h e r e c r e a t i o n d e p a r t m e n t . A l l c a l l s were r e t u r n e d w i t h i n one week. TELEPHONE INTERVIEW RECORD SUBJECT'S Name Work  Phone  PROCEDURES: ( i n t r o d u c e  self,  and  study)  The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y i s t o o f f e r a s t r e s s - m a n a g e m e n t p r o g r a m and t o examine how you d e a l w i t h s t r e s s . T h e r e w i l l be a $15.00 r e g i s t r a t i o n c h a r g e and p a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l be e x p e c t e d t o a t t e n d a l l s e s s i o n s and a f i n a l one h o u r i n t e r v i e w 8-weeks a f t e r t h e l a s t s e s s i o n . Your i n v o l v e m e n t w i l l be f o r 8 weeks, once a week f o r one and o n e - h a l f h o u r s i n a g r o u p p r o g r a m . You w i l l be g i v e n some p a p e r and p e n c i l p s y c h o l o g i c a l a s s e s s m e n t s at the f i r s t i n t e r v i e w , d u r i n g your l a s t group m e e t i n g and d u r i n g t h e f i n a l i n t e r v i e w . T h e r e w i l l be two p r o g r a m s o f f e r e d , one w i l l i n v o l v e r e l a x a t i o n and t h e o t h e r w i l l i n v o l v e e x e r c i s e as a means t o d e a l w i t h y o u r s t r e s s . ( P a r t i c i p a n t s must be w i l l i n g t o be a s s i g n e d e i t h e r t o a r e l a x a t i o n or e x e r c i s e program). Do  you  have any  W o u l d you  like  questions? to p a r t i c i p a t e ?  B e f o r e we s e t a d a t e f o r t h e i n i t i a l i n t e r v i e w I w o u l d l i k e l i k e t o ask you a few questions. I s t h e r e any r e a s o n why you may n o t be a b l e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n an e x e r c i s e p r o g r a m ? ( h i g h b l o o d p r e s s u r e , l e g p r o b l e m s ) . How o f t e n do you e x e r c i s e ? (what t y p e — m u s t be l e s s t h a n 3 t i m e s per w e e k — 3 0 minutes or less). When was t h e l a s t t i m e you e x e r c i s e d on a r e g u l a r b a s i s ? Have y o u e v e r been i n v o l v e d i n a r e l a x a t i o n o r stress-management program? W o u l d y o u p r e f e r t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a p r o g r a m on S a t . o r Sun. o r w o u l d you p r e f e r a T u e s d a y o r Wednesday e v e n i n g ? I n t h e p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w I w i l l be a s k i n g you q u e s t i o n s s u c h a s : "Can you d e s c r i b e s i t u a t i o n s a t work w h i c h make you feel a n x i o u s , and What do you do when you f e e l stressed?" Set the contact  d a t e and t i m e f o r i n t e r v i e w — l e a v e i f t h e y c a n ' t make i t .  phone number  to  91  Interview  Protocol  Check t h e i n d i v i d u a l  telephone  sheet  b o t h t h e work a n d home phone numbers s u b j e c t s where  they heard about  t h e y have any q u e s t i o n s a b o u t to  read the informed consent  before  they  was s a i d  sign  Do a r e v i e w hour in  are correct.  t h e p r o g r a m . Ask t h e y i f  and v e r b a l l y  they w i l l  interview only i t w i l l  what  eight  one a n d o n e - h a l f  be a s k e d  be done  will  be s i m i l a r t o  i n small  groups.  t h e P a r Q w i t h a l l s u b j e c t s . Ask them  p r o g r a m . Check t h a t  t i m e s p e r week Ask  (for less  than  i f there  they a r e e x e r c i s i n g  i nthe  less  than 3  30 m i n u t e s p e r s e s s i o n ) .  t h e s u b j e c t s t o d e s c r i b e two c h r o n i c work  s t r e s s o r s . T h i s i s to prepare questionnaire. After them t o f i l l over  that  t o f i l l out  any r e a s o n why t h e y may n o t be a b l e t o p a r t i c i p a t e  exercise  out  i t reviews  s e s s i o n s - - f o l l o w - u p i n t e r v i e w i n May. A l s o m e n t i o n  Go o v e r  or  i t t o them  call).  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The f o l l o w - u p s e s s i o n  is  Ask them  explain  (Basically  o f t i m e commitments  the 8th session  this  that  Ask t h e  the telephone c a l l .  i t . Questions?  i n the telephone  t o make s u r e  t h e y have d e s c r i b e d t h e s t r e s s o r s a s k  i n t h e T e n s i o n Thermometer. They must  t o be p a r t  the f i r s t  them f o r t h e f i r s t  of t h i s  score 5  p r o g r a m . Then a s k them t o  questionnaire  make s u r e t h e y u n d e r s t a n d t h e  initial  i n s t r u c t i o n s and c l a r i f y  written  out the s t r e s s o r  they  fill  that  will  after  they have  be a n s w e r i n g  the q u e s t i o n s w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o i t ( t h i s  will  the rest of  take  from  15  92 to  20  minutes—leave Before  filling the  the out  the  subjects  (1)  Both groups w i l l  room). the  next  s e t of q u e s t i o n n a i r e s  following information c o n s i s t of  on  the  aproximately  give  programs. 15 women w i t h  2  co-leaders. (2) The other will  purpose of  members of  the  the  as  (3) E x p l a i n  the  the  progress  slowly  jogging  skills.  start  you  will  sitting  be  with  the  able  with  the  i n has  We  been  program. walk/jog  level  you  individual  are  at  Relaxation—you  will  muscle groups complete  i n c h a i r s while  the  subjects  the  randomly  group they  will  and  you  basic  learn  to  i n y o u r body so  r e l a x a t i o n (you the  on  participants  will  on  what t o wear be  leaders  Thank them f o r c o m i n g .  an  i n and  parking  that  will  guide  f o r the a  few  envelope  give area,  i t . (this  telephoned  starts.  select  be  location,  group leader  instructions  session  stress.  teaching  to a t t a i n  time, date,  number of  are  the  be  you  relaxation process).  Have t h e indicates  the  t o meet  i n t e n s i o n of  relax various  comfortably  through the  p r o g r a m you  at  be  l e a r n about  exercise program—a  (4) E x p l a i n P r o g r e s s i v e and  to  a stress-management  program which w i l l  tighten  session w i l l  g r o u p and  a l s o d i s c u s s how  successful  first  them a and  form w i l l  first  which form  phone also  give  session). A l l  days b e f o r e  the  first  93 INFORMED CONSENT DOCUMENT D a t e : November, 1985 Purpose of t h e Study: This  investigation  i s being conducted  w o r k i n g women i n managing t h e i r  stress  to assist and a n x i e t y .  Procedure: As  a p a r t i c i p a n t y o u w i l l be a s k e d t o do s e v e r a l things: 1. Take p a p e r and p e n c i l t e s t s (20-30 m i n u t e s ) at t h e b e g i n n i n g and end o f t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n . 2. P a r t i c i p a t e i n 8 g r o u p t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s w h i c h w i l l not exceed 1 V 2 hours i n l e n g t h per s e s s i o n . 3. R e t u r n 8 weeks a f t e r t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e . s e s s i o n s f o r a one h o u r p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w d u r i n g which you w i l l a g a i n complete paper and p e n c i l t e s t s . 4. Pay $15.00  T h i s i s t o c e r t i f y that I, , hereby a g r e e t o v o l u n t a r i l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n on s t r e s s . I have been t o l d t h a t I do n o t have t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , t h a t I am f r e e t o w i t h d r a w my c o n s e n t and may t e r m i n a t e my p a r t i c i p a t i o n a t any t i m e , a n d t h i s w i l l n o t j e o p a r d i z e my o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n o t h e r p r o g r a m s s p o n s o r e d by U.B.C.'s S c h o o l o f P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n . Anything I say or data that i s c o l l e c t e d w i l l r e m a i n c o n f i d e n t i a l w i t h r e g a r d t o my i d e n t i t y . I u n d e r s t a n d t h a t I am f r e e t o deny any answer t o s p e c i f i c items o r q u e s t i o n s i n i n t e r v i e w s or q u e s t i o n a i r e s or d u r i n g the t r a i n i n g sessions. I have h a d a c h a n c e t o a s k any q u e s t i o n s I want a b o u t t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , a n d t h e y have been a n s w e r e d t o my s a t i s f a c t i o n . I have a l s o been t o l d t h a t I may a s k any q u e s t i o n s I have a t any t i m e d u r i n g t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n , a n d t h a t t h e y w i l l be a n s w e r e d t o my s a t i s f a c t i o n .  date Faculty Supervisor B o n i t a Long  participant's  signature  Investigator's  Signature  ;94  APPENDIX B  Tension  Thermometer Par  Q  No. PAST  Think as the to  back  much  the past  TENSION  week.  a s y o u c a n o f what  level rate  over  WEEK  average  level  5  THERMOMETER  Take  each  y o u d i d , how  o f t e n s i o n you experienced.  your  9  day s e p a r a t e l y and remember  t h e day went, and Now,  of tension  -  use t h e thermometer week.  10 c o m p l e t e l y  tense  (.not r e l a x e d at a l l )  (only  slightly  9 tense  relaxed  7 6  -  below  f o r the past  8 very  -  particularly  tense  5 4 relaxed  -  3 2 very  -  relaxed  1 0 completely  relaxed  (not tense at a l l )  P H Y S I C A L ACTIVITY READINESS QUESTIONNAIRE (PAR-Q)*  .96  A Self-administered Questionnaire for Adults  I  K  wmlm mm  P A R - Q is designod to holp you holp yourself. Many health benefits are associated with regular e x e r c i s o , and tho completion o( P A R - Q is a sensible tirsl step to take i l you are planning to increase the amount of physical a c t i v i t y in your life. For most people physical activity should not pose any problem or hazard. P A R - Q has been designed to identify the small number of adults for whom physical a c t i v i t y might be inappropriate or thjpse who should have medical advice concerning tho type of activity most suitable for them.  ISIS!  Common sense is your best guide in answering these few questions. Please read them carefully and check the 0 Y E S or N O opposite tho question if it applies to y o u .  YES NO Mas your doctor ov<;r said you havo hoar! trotiblo?  •  • 2 . Do you frequently havo pains In your hoart and chest?  •  • 3 - D o you olten leel faint or havo s p e l l s of severo d i z z i n e s s ? Has a doctor over said your blood pressure was too high?  • • 5 .  Has your doctor ever told you that you have a bone or join! problem such as arthritis that has been aggravated by e x e r c i s e , or might bo made worse with e x e r c i s e ?  • • a -  Is there a good physical reason no! monlioned here why you should not lollow an activity program even if you wanted to7 Are you over age 65 and not accustomed to vigorous e x e r c i s e ?  If you have not recently done so, consult with your personal physician by telephone or in person B E F O R E increasing your physical activity and/or taking a fitness test. T e l l him what questions you answered Y E S on P A R - Q , or show him your copy.  mmmmmm  After modical ovaluntion, seok advico from your physician as to youi suitability lor; O unrestricted physical a c t i v i t y , probably on a gradually increasing b a s i s . © restricted or supervised activity to meet your s p o c i l i c needs, at least on an initial b a s i s . Check in your community for special programs or s e r v i c e s .  i  If you answered PAR--Q accurately, you have reasonable assurance of your present suitability for: © A GRADUATED EXERCISE PROGRAM A gradual increase in proper exercise p i o motes good fitness development while minimizing or eliminating discomfort. © A N E X E R C I S E T E S T - Simple tests of fitness (such as the Canadian Home F i t n e s s Test) or more complex types may be undertaken i l you so d e s i r e .  mmmm  If you have a temporary minor i l l n e s s , Such as a common c o l d .  97  APPENDIX C  E x a m p l e s of  Perceived  Stressors  9#  EXAMPLES OF PERCEIVED  Trying  t o keep up w i t h  Tension  the  pressure--phones  Homework  Marking  Visitors  ringing.  piling  Heavy w o r k l o a d - - t i g h t  up—constant.  deadline.  continuing to arrive  Constant  interruptions.  Stressful  union  Anxious about  I will  how  a major p r o j e c t  express  blamed  on t h e j o b .  meetings.  Unable t o c o n c e n t r a t e  Being  workload.  due t o a b o r i n g j o b .  Constant  How  STRESSORS  will  turn out.  a t work.  myself  at business  meetings.  f o r p r o b l e m s w h i c h a r e n o t under  control. Students  not l i s t e n i n g t o  Pressures  o f emergency h o s p i t a l  Reorganization Difficult Disruptive Lack  instructions.  o f work s e t t i n g  work. (layoffs  clients. passengers.  o f m o r a l e on t h e j o b .  Boss d i f f i c u l t  to get along  with.  etc.).  my  99  APPENDIX D  Dependent General  Measures  Self-Efficacy  Scale  ion Self-Efficacy  Instructions: F o r e a c h s t a t e m e n t l i s t e d b e l o w , i n d i c a t e t o what d e g r e e , on t h e f o u r t e e n p o i n t s c a l e , y o u a g r e e o r d i s a g r e e w i t h t h e s t a t e m e n t a s a r e f l e c t i o n o f how y o u f e e l about y o u r s e l f . S t r o n g l y Agree 1 2 3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Strongly 12  Disagree 13 14  1.  When I make p l a n s , 1 am c e r t a i n I c a n make them w o r k .  2.  One o f my p r o b l e m s i s t h a t 1 c a n n o t g e t down t o w o r k when I s h o u l d .  3.  I f I can't  4.  When I s e t i m p o r t a n t  5.  I g i v e up o n t h i n g s b e f o r e  6.  I avoid  7.  I f something looks  8.  When I h a v e s o m e t h i n g u n p l e a s a n t it.  9.  When I d e c i d e  do a j o b t h e f i r s t  facing  goals  time.  I keep t r y i n g  f o r myself, completing  I rarely  until  achieve  Ican. them.  them.  difficulties. too complicated,  I will  n o t even bother  t o do, I s t i c k  t o do s o m e t h i n g , I go r i g h t  to i t until  to t r y i t . I finish  t o work on i t .  10.  When t r y i n g t o l e a r n s o m e t h i n g new, I s o o n g i v e up i f I am n o t i n i t i a l l y successful.  11.  When u n e x p e c t e d p r o b l e m s o c c u r ,  12.  I avoid me.  13.  F a i l u r e j u s t makes me t r y h a r d e r .  14.  I feel  15.  I am a s e l f - r e l i a n t  16.  I g i v e up e a s i l y .  17.  I do n o t seem c a p a b l e life.  trying  insecure  I d o n ' t h a n d l e them  t o l e a r n new t h i n g s when t h e y  a b o u t my a b i l i t y  look  well.  too d i f f i c u l t f o r  t o do t h i n g s .  person.  o f d e a l i n g w i t h most p r o b l e m s t h a t come up i n  APPENDIX  Revised Factor  form of  Analysis  and  E  Checklist Reliability  102  Revised Coping  was a s s e s s e d  Ways o f c o p i n g The  revised  contains asked  Checklist  instrument  67 i t e m s  with a revised (Folkman  (Lazarus  on a 4 - p o i n t  within the past  i t e m on t h e c h e c k l i s t used  Factor  & Lazarus,  1980).  & F o l k m a n , 1984) scale.  Subjects work  and then  indicate just  were  event  two weeks a n d t o r e a d  i t i n the s i t u a t i o n  67-item  checklist  w o r k i n g women aged percent  each  t o what  extent  described.  was a d m i n i s t e r e d  o f t h e sample were m a r r i e d ,  t h e women h a d a h i g h of c o l l e g e ,  The  1 to 3  d e g r e e a n d 11%  and p r o f e s s i o n s .  were a n a l y z e d  factor  (theorized  as P-focused  rotation.  Fifteen  analysis  items  The o t h e r  using a p r i n c i p a l  calling  f o r two f a c t o r s  and E-focused) loaded 28 i t e m s  using  varimax  h i g h l y on e a c h o f t h e were e l i m i n a t e d  because they  (a) l a c k e d c o n c e p t u a l  loaded  .40, o r ( c ) l o a d e d  below  22% f r o m  (MA, P h D ) . See A p p e n d i x F f o r a  components  two f a c t o r s .  34% were s i n g l e a n d  school education,  of occupations  items  Forty  Twenty-two p e r c e n t o f  45% a u n i v e r s i t y  p r o f e s s i o n a l degrees description  t o 192  18 t o 61 (M=35.4, SD=9.7).  were d i v o r c e d o r s e p a r a t e d .  years  version of the  Structure  The  18%  Checklist  t o w r i t e o u t t h e most s t r e s s f u l  occuring  they  Coping  coherence,  on b o t h  (b)  factors.  103"  The  thirty  subjected 29%  i t e m s w h i c h made up to another  of the t o t a l  above f a c t o r s t r u c t u r e within  r=  both).  .81  for  final  factor analysis  variance.  consistency  the  each  and  and  I tern-analysis indicated  scale  checklist  was  accounted  for  supported  strong  (Cronbach's  the  internal  alphas  equal  C o p i n g S c a l e s ( R e v i s e d 30 P-Focused  Factor Loading  Items) E-Focused  Factor Loading  9 C r i t i s i z e d or l e c t u r e d myself.  .48  10 T r i e d not t o b u r n my b r i d g e s , but l e a v e t h i n g s somewhat open.  .46  20 I was i n s p i r e d t o do something c r e a t i v e .  .51  11 Hoped a m i r a c l e would happen.  .47  23 Changed o r grew as a p e r s o n i n a good way.  .56  12 Went a l o n g w i t h f a t e , sometimes I j u s t have bad l u c k .  .48  26 I made a p l a n of a c t i o n and f o l l o w e d i t . .51  21 T r i e d t o f o r g e t the whole t h i n g .  .42  30 I came o u t of t h e e x p e r i e n c e b e t t e r than I went i n .  .60  24 I w a i t e d t o see what would happen b e f o r e doing anything.  .47  31 T a l k e d t o someone who c o u l d do s o m e t h i n g c o n c r e t e a b o u t the problem.  .53  29 R e a l i z e d I b r o u g h t on the problem m y s e l f .  .48  34 Took a b i g chance o r d i d something very risky.  .41  33 T r i e d t o make m y s e l f f e e l b e t t e r by e a t i n g , smoking, u s i n g d r u g s or m e d i c a t i o n e t c .  .56  35 I t r i e d not t o a c t t o o h a s t i l y or f o l l o w my f i r s t hunch.  .46  40 A v o i d e d b e i n g w i t h people i n general.  .53  39 Changed s o m e t h i n g so t h i n g s would t u r n out a l l right.  .65  43 Kept o t h e r s from knowing how bad t h i n g s were.  .43  46 S t o o d my g r o u n d and f o u g h t f o r what I wanted.  .61  47 Took i t out on o t h e r people.  .50  49 1 knew what had t o be done, so I d o u b l e d my e f f o r t s t o make t h i n g s work o u t .  .45  51 I made a p r o m i s e t o myself that t h i n g s would be d i f f e r e n t next time.  .54  52 Came up w i t h a c o u p l e of d i f f e r e n t s o l u t i o n s to the problem.  .70  55 Wished t h a t I c o u l d change what had happened or how I  .55  56 I changed  .48  57 I daydreamed or I was i n .  .62  63 I t h o u g h t about how a .40 p e r s o n i a d m i r e would handle t h i s s i t u a t i o n and used t h a t as a model.  58 Wished t h a t the s i t u a t i o n would go away.  .60  64 I t r i e d t o see t h i n g s .50 from t h e o t h e r p e r s o n ' s p o i n t of v i e w .  59 Had f a n t a s i e s or w i s h e s about how t h i n g s might turn out.  .72  something  105  APPENDIX F  Ancillary  Measures  (pre/post/follow-up)  7-Day  Recall  Occupat ions Homework Expectancy  Sheets  Questionnaire  No.  EXERCISE HISTORY  106  7-DAY RECALL  P l e a s e r e c o r d your p a t t e r n o f p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t y o v e r t h e p a s t week. I t i s e a s i e r i f you work backwards from t o d a y s d a t e . I f you don't know e x a c t l y how l o n g you e x e r c i s e d , e s t i m a t e as w e l l as you c a n . R e f e r t o the c h a r t below t o e s t i m a t e i n t e n s i t y ( B o r g S c a l e ) . Day  Activity  (describe)  Duration i n Minutes  Intensity**  Monday  Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday  Saturday Sunday  **Borg S c a l e To r a t e t h e i n t e n s i t y o f a c t i v i t y , you a r e t o r a t e y o u r f e e l i n g s w h i c h a r e caused by t h e work and n o t t h e work i t s e l f . These f e e l i n g s s h o u l d be g e n e r a l , t h a t i s about t h e body as a w h o l e . We a r e n o t a s k i n g you t o s p e c i f y t h e f e e l i n g , b u t t o s e l e c t a number w h i c h most a c c u r a t e l y c o r r e s p o n d s t o y o u r p e r c e p t i o n o f y o u r t o t a l body f e e l i n g . Keep i n mind t h a t t h e r e a r e no r i g h t or wrong numbers. Use any number you t h i n k i s a p p r o p r i a t e : 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1.7 18 1<)  Very, very l i g h t Very  light  Fairly  light  Somewhat h a r d Hard Vory Iwird V i ' i y , vory Imnl  OCCUPATIONS Secretary Book K e e p e r Nurse Teacher Counsellor Student Librarian Computer C o n s u l t a n t Computer  Programmer  Sales Manager Admi n i s t r a t e r Director Telecommunications Waitress Flight  Attendent  Self  Employed  Baby  Sitter  Instructors T r a v e l Agent Professor  PROFESSIONS  108 WITH REGARD TO COPING WITH STRESS:  (POST ONLY)  5. I n what ways, i f any do you f e e l d i f f e r e n t l y ( i . e . , e m o t i o n a l l y ) t h a n you d i d b e f o r e t h i s workshop s t a r t e d ? 6. I n what ways do you behave d i f f e r e n t l y ( i . e . , what you do) than you d i d b e f o r e t h i s w o r k s h o p started?  See n e x t page f o r question 5, 6 and 7.  7. I n what ways do you t h i n k d i f f e r e n t l y ( i . e . , u n d e r s t a n d i n g s ) than you d i d b e f o r e t h i s workshop s t a r t e d ? 8. To what d e g r e e have y o u been s u c c e s s f u l w i t h relaxation/jogging goals. GOAL 1 EX REL 1 2 3 4 5 unsuccessful moderately v e r y 4 16 23 20 (1 s u b j e c t d i d n o t l i s t 3 g o a l s ) 19 36 39 12 15 16  your GOAL 2 GOAL 3 EX REL EX REL 12 19 31 34 4  16 24 32 12 16  4 27 15 42 12  To what d e g r e e , i f a t a l l , were t h e f o l l o w i n g a s p e c t s of t h i s program h e l p f u l t o you i n l e a r n i n g t o cope w i t h s t r e s s ? ( c i r c l e t h e answer) (a) s u p p o r t and encouragement o f t h e group 1 2 not a t a l l (b) t h e a c t u a l 1 2 not a t a l l  3 somewhat  5 very  (jog/relax) activity 3 somewhat  (c) d i s c u s s i o n s a f t e r 1 2 not a t a l l  4  4  5 very  the a c t i v i t y  3 somewhat  4  5 very  (d) i n c r e a s e d knowledge o f s t r e s s 1 2 not a t a l l  3 somewhat  4  5 very  (e) encouragement from t h e l e a d e r s 1 2 not a t a l l  3 somewhat  4  5 very  EX. M = 3.7 REL. M = 3.0  EX. M = 4.0 REL. M = 3.9  EX. M = 3.5 REL. M = 2.9  EX. M = 3.6 REL. M = 3.7  EX. M = 4.1 REL. M = 3.8  32 20 16 16 4  109 (POST ONLY) L i s t e d b e l o w a r e 5.  responses  I n w h a t w a y s , i f any do y o u f e e l e m o t i o n a l l y ) than you d i d b e f o r e started?  6.  feel feel feel feel feel  I can c o n t r o l s t r e s s . happier. more r e l a x e d . more m o t i v a t e d . less serious.  often,  differently (i.e., t h i s workshop  I f e e l more r e l a x e d . I appear l e s s tense. I f e e l more i n c o n t r o l , I f e e l more c o n f i d e n t . I am s o m e w h a t h a p p i e r .  I n w h a t w a y s do y o u b e h a v e d i f f e r e n t l y ( i . e . , w h a t do) t h a n you d i d b e f o r e t h i s w o r k s h o p s t a r t e d ?  I recognize s t r e s s f u l s i t u a t i o n s sooner. I exercise regularly. U n d e r s t r e s s I am c a l m e r . I think before reacting. I see more a l t e r n a t i v e s t o problems. I am m o r e m o t i v a t e d . I s m i l e and l a u g h more. I n w h a t ways do y o u than you d i d b e f o r e Exercise  you  Relaxation  Exercise  7.  most  Relaxation  Exercise I I I I I  listed  I am m o r e a s s e r t i v e i n personal s i t u a t i o n s . I take time f o r myself, I don't r e a c t as negatively. I'm o n l y d o i n g w o r k t h a t i n t e r e s t s me. I use m u s c l e t e n s i o n relaxation techniques.  think differently (i.e., t h i s workshop s t a r t e d ?  understanding)  Relaxation  I u n d e r s t a n d my own stress I d o n ' t c a r e a b o u t my "triggers". employers harrassment techniques. I am n o t s o q u i c k t o r e a c t . I am m o r e c o n s c i o u s a b o u t r e l a x i n g , I am m o r e a w a r e o f tension. I have more c o n t r o l . I have e s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r i t i e s - w h a t must I r e a l i z e the i m p o r t a n c e of be d o n e - - w h a t I am exercise. U n d e r s t a n d more a b o u t I recognize emotional well-being my own stress. is important.  110 POST AND FOLLOW-UP  QUESTIONNAIRE  INSTRUCTIONS: Read t h e q u e s t i o n s c a r e f u l l y and c i r c l e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e answer.  I n g e n e r a l , t o what d e g r e e do y o u s u c c e s s f u l l y cope w i t h s t r e s s i n NONWORK s i t u a t i o n s ?  1 2 not a t a l l  3 somewhat  4  5  very  3 somewhat  4  very  5  3 somewhat  4  very  0 23 23 42 12  0 12 44 32 12  0 12 38 50 0  4 4 48 32 12  well  To what e x t e n t i s j o g g i n g / r e l a x a t i o n helping you deal with s t r e s s ?  1 2 not a t a l l  Follow-up % EX. REL. 4 0 4 8 52 52 28 26 8 18  well  I n g e n e r a l , t o what d e g r e e do y o u s u c c e s s f u l l y cope w i t h s t r e s s i n WORK s i t u a t i o n s ?  1 2 not a t a l l  Post % EX. REL. 0 0 4 4 39 56 42 32 15 8  5  (POST ONLY) 4 15 35 42 4  8 16 48 20 8  well  4. To what e x t e n t do you u s e t h e f o l l o w i n g e l e m e n t s of r e l a x a t i o n / j o g g i n g t o r e l i e v e s t r e s s ? RELAXATION/JOGGING AS: (a) a d i s t r a c t o r 1 never  2  3 somewhat  5 often  4  (b) a s e n s e o f c o n t r o l 1 never  2  3 somewhat  4  5 often  (c) mood change from n e g a t i v e t o positive 1 never  2  3 somewhat  (d) a t e n s i o n 1 never  2  4  5 often  2  12 19 12 42 15  8 44 28 16 4  17 21 21 29 13  8 29 33 29 0  4 8 23 39 27  8 28 28 24 12  8 4 33 29 25  13 17 46 25 0  4 0 27 39 31  8 20 32 40 0  0 8 25 38 29  8 4 17 54 17  0 8 15 42 35  4 12 28 36 20  0 0 19 42 27  4 35 26 34 0  release  3, somewhat  4  5 often  (e) a f e e l i n g o f w e l l - b e i n g 1 never  F o l l o w -up Post % 15 16 20 17 20 19 12 13 27 36 20 38 17 27 24 25 12 12 17 17  3 somewhat  4  5 often  Ill (FOLLOW-UP ONLY) 5.  6.  Did two  any m a j o r months?  stresses  occur during  the  past YES NO  D i d you seek any a d d i t i o n a l h e l p f o r s t r e s s d u r i n g t h e p a s t two months? (check ) ( S u b j e c t s i n d i c a t e d more t h a n 1 r e s p o n s e ) Medical (family physician) Counselling Exercise Training S e l f - h e l p ( i . e . , books) S t r e s s workshops Relaxation training Other None  7.  What has g o t t e n i n t h e way of m a i n t a i n i n g y o u r j o g g i n g / r e l a x a t i o n program? ( S u b j e c t s i n d i c a t e d more t h a n 1 r e s p o n s e )  EX.% 46 50  REL.% 32 68  EX.  REL.  27 4 23 0 0 0 16 56  24 8 8 4 4 20 12 44  EX.  REL.  54 28 20 28 50 28 12 36 0  40 40 56 16 0 0 0 0 40  EX.  REL.  work s c h e d u l e procrastInation personal motivation_ illness weather injury h o i iday laziness other . Have you months?  10.  jobs  during  the  past  1 2 at a l l  •Exercise  two  12 88  YES NO  To what e x t e n t have you m a i n t a i n e d j o g g i n g / r e l a x a t i o n program? not  8.  changed  3 4 5 somewhat v e r y much  Question  8 92  your EX.  M  =  3.04  REL.  M  =  2.20  so  Only:  To what do you c o n t r i b u t e m a i n t e n c e of e x e r c i s e ? ( S u b j e c t s i n d i c a t e d more t h a n 1 r e s p o n s e ) spouse/partner support s o c i a l experience e s t a b l i s h e d p a t t e r n of f e e l i n g good health other  exercise ~  EX. 28 20 50 54 46 24  112 HOMEWORK C H A R T S The a v e r a g e week. The  length  Feelings  number  of p r a c t i s e s e s s i o n s  of p r a c t i s e sessions.  Ratings  REL. 3  EX. Mean ( m i n u t e s ) 25 Range 15-60  REL. 15 10-40  g e a r e d up annoyed up t i g h t energetic rushed good  after. relaxed tired great exhilerated refreshed calm of perceived Borg  Ratings  EX. 3  before exercise/relaxation. tense tired calm lazy hyper ok  Feelings  per  energetic good exhausted better warm l e s s tense exertion  scale Range— Mean  of perceived Anxiety  anxiety  scale  f o r EXERCISE. (6-20) (13) for  Range— Mean  RELAXATION. (1-100) (25)  See n e x t page f o r d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e B o r g Anxiety scale.  scale  and t h e  DAY  F E E L I N G BEFORE  1 Absolutely  Calm  WEEKLY RELAXATION CHAPT LENGTH (min.) RATING OF ANXIETY  ANXIETY RATING  F E E L I N G AFTER  SCALE  T h i n k o f t h e w o r s t a n x i e t y you have e v e r experienced o r c a n i m a g i n e e x p e r i e n c i n g , and a s s i g n t o t h i s t h e number 100. Now t h i n k o f t h e s t a t e o f b e i n g a b s o l u t e l y c a l m and c a l l t h i s z e r o . Mow you have a s c a l e o f a n x i e t y . On t h i s s c a l e , how do you r a t e y o u r s e l f a t t h i s moment?  10 0 H i g h e s t  Anxiety  113  WEEKLY EXERCISE CHART FEELING  DAY  6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  very,  very  very  BEFORE  light  light  fairly  light  somewhat  hard  hard very  hard  very  very  hard  LENGTH OF .TOG/^aT,?  fnin  ) * RPF  BORG  FT-?T,T''r.  RTTTR  SCALE  To r a t e t h e i n t e n s i t y o f a c t i v i t y , y o u a r e t o r a t e y o u r f e e l i n g s w h i c h a r e c a u s e d b y t h e work and n o t the work i t s e l f . T h e s e f e e l i n g s s h o u l d be g e n e r a l , t h a t i s about t h e body a s a w h o l e . We a r e n o t a s k i n g you t o s p e c i f y t h e f e e l i n g , b u t t o s e l e c t a number w h i c h most a c c u r a t e l y c o r r e s p o n d s t o v c u r t o t a l b o d y f e e l i n g . Keep i r . mine t h a t t h e r e a r e no r i g h t o r wronc a n s w e r s . Use any number y o u t h i n k i s a p p r o p r i a t e .  iitness  *P.PE R a t e o f P e r c e i v e d  Exertion  (Borg  Scale)  114  Da t.e:  Mo.  EXPECTANCY  115  QUESTIONNAIRE  1.  "How c o n f i d e n t a r e y o u t h a t t h i s p r o g r a m w i l l reducing your s t r e s s r e a c t i o n s ? "  Not  at a l l  2.  "How l o g i c a l d o c s t h i s t y p e o f p r o g r a m seem t o y o u a s a s t r e s s management technique?"  0  be s u c c e s s f u l i n  V e r y much s o  1  2  3  A  5_  Not  at a l l  3.  "How c o n f i d e n t a r e y o u i n r e c o m m e n d i n g t h e p r o g r a m t o n f r i e n d extremely anxious?"  Not  at a l l  6_ V e r y much so  who i s  V e r y much so  116  Number  1. How c o n f i d e n t a r e y o u t h a t t h a t t h i s p r o g r a m h a s been s u c c e s s f u l i n reducing your s t r e s s r e a c t i o n s ?  not  at a l l  v e r y much so  2. How l o g i c a l d o e s t h i s t y p e o f p r o g r a m a stress-management technique?  not  at a l l  seem t o y o u a s  v e r y much so  3. How c o n f i d e n t a r e y o u i n r e c o m m e n d i n g - t h e a f r i e n d who i s e x t r e m e l y anxious?  not  at a l l  program t o  v e r y much so  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0077232/manifest

Comment

Related Items