Integrating appraisal processes in the study demands-resources framework - a diary study.

IF 2.3 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Anxiety Stress and Coping Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1080/10615806.2022.2117306
Annika Schmiedl, Eva-Maria Schulte, Simone Kauffeld
{"title":"Integrating appraisal processes in the study demands-resources framework - a diary study.","authors":"Annika Schmiedl,&nbsp;Eva-Maria Schulte,&nbsp;Simone Kauffeld","doi":"10.1080/10615806.2022.2117306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Students face various demands that can lead to health complaints. Hindering demands appear to be especially harmful. Since the perception of demands differs between persons, their individual appraisal determines stress perception. However, individual appraisal processes are largely neglected in research. Therefore, this study builds on the study demands-resources model in examining the dynamics of students' demand-appraisal processes and their effects on well-being.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>During ten days in a four-week period, 247 students participated in a diary study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed our data via multilevel path analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analyses revealed that the student's appraisal of the same demands varied across days and depended on available resources, i.e., the received support quality on the respective day. Appraising demands as hindering was positively linked to the perception of stress on the same day. Daily perception of stress was positively linked to person-level strain and health complaints after four weeks.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results highlight the importance of assessing the individual appraisal of demands rather than pre-categorizing demands. Furthermore, our findings identify social support as a crucial resource in reducing hindering appraisal; hence, it should be included in student-focused stress-management interventions. Limitations and further implications are also discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":51415,"journal":{"name":"Anxiety Stress and Coping","volume":"36 4","pages":"444-459"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anxiety Stress and Coping","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2022.2117306","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background and objectives: Students face various demands that can lead to health complaints. Hindering demands appear to be especially harmful. Since the perception of demands differs between persons, their individual appraisal determines stress perception. However, individual appraisal processes are largely neglected in research. Therefore, this study builds on the study demands-resources model in examining the dynamics of students' demand-appraisal processes and their effects on well-being.

Design: During ten days in a four-week period, 247 students participated in a diary study.

Methods: We analyzed our data via multilevel path analysis.

Results: Our analyses revealed that the student's appraisal of the same demands varied across days and depended on available resources, i.e., the received support quality on the respective day. Appraising demands as hindering was positively linked to the perception of stress on the same day. Daily perception of stress was positively linked to person-level strain and health complaints after four weeks.

Conclusions: The results highlight the importance of assessing the individual appraisal of demands rather than pre-categorizing demands. Furthermore, our findings identify social support as a crucial resource in reducing hindering appraisal; hence, it should be included in student-focused stress-management interventions. Limitations and further implications are also discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在研究需求-资源框架中整合评估过程-日记研究。
背景和目的:学生面临各种可能导致健康投诉的需求。阻碍需求似乎尤其有害。由于个体对需求的感知存在差异,个体的评价决定了个体对压力的感知。然而,个体评价过程在很大程度上被研究忽视了。因此,本研究以学习需求-资源模型为基础,考察学生需求-评估过程的动态及其对幸福感的影响。设计:在为期四周的10天时间里,247名学生参加了一项日记研究。方法:采用多层次路径分析法对资料进行分析。结果:我们的分析显示,学生对相同需求的评价在不同的日子里有所不同,并取决于可用的资源,即在各自的日子里收到的支持质量。将需求评价为阻碍与当天的压力感知呈正相关。日常压力感知与个人水平的压力和四周后的健康投诉呈正相关。结论:研究结果强调了对需求进行个体评估的重要性,而不是对需求进行预分类。此外,我们的研究结果确定社会支持是减少阻碍评价的关键资源;因此,它应该包括在以学生为中心的压力管理干预措施中。还讨论了局限性和进一步的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: This journal provides a forum for scientific, theoretically important, and clinically significant research reports and conceptual contributions. It deals with experimental and field studies on anxiety dimensions and stress and coping processes, but also with related topics such as the antecedents and consequences of stress and emotion. We also encourage submissions contributing to the understanding of the relationship between psychological and physiological processes, specific for stress and anxiety. Manuscripts should report novel findings that are of interest to an international readership. While the journal is open to a diversity of articles.
期刊最新文献
Music performance anxiety: priority targets in prevention and intervention. Morally uncertain: the influence of intolerance of uncertainty and perceived responsibility on moral pain. Effects of cognitive flexibility on dynamics of emotion regulation and negative affect in daily life. The effect of social anxiety on social attention in naturalistic situations. The relationship between worry and academic performance: examining the moderating role of attention control.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1