AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF 
Jennifer Rebecca Burleson for the Master of Science 
m Psychology presented on June 26, 2000 
Title: An Inyestigation of the Coping Strategies Utilized by Traditional and 
Nontraditional Students 
Abstract approved by: ~.9 2---­
 With a constant barrage of role ambiguity, time pressures, and seemingly never-ending 
social problems affecting daily life, stress has become a significant aspect of many 
individuals' existence. Coping has become increasingly recognized as one ofthe major 
interceding variables involved in the effects of stress. The present study investigated the 
relationship between stress and coping strategies in a university population. Participants 
were 86 undergraduate student volunteers: 50 traditional students (25 men and 25 
women) and 36 nontraditional students (15 men and 21 women) enrolled in introductory 
and developmental psychology classes. The Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations 
(CISS) was used to assess three different coping strategies: task-oriented coping, 
emotion-oriented coping, and avoidance coping. Results indicated that traditional 
students utilized avoidance coping strategies significantly more than nontraditional 
students. There were no significant relationships between gender and coping strategies. 
Despite having had more experiences with varied life stressors, the relationship between 
nontraditional students and coping appears to be less direct than predicted. Future 
research investigating this area should consider including a larger number of participants 
within each group in order to ensure greater generalizability. 
AN INVESnGAnON OF THE COPING STRATEGIES UTILIZED BY 
TRADITIONAL AND NONTRADITIONAL STUDENTS
 
A Thesis
 
Presented to
 
the Department of Psychology and Special Education
 
EMPORIA STATE UNNERSITY
 
In Partial Fulfillment
 
of the Requirements for the Degree
 
Master of Science
 
by
 
Jennifer Rebecca Burleson
 
August 2000
 
-()/es/~, 
~ooo 
t3 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
I would like to thank my advisor and thesis chair Dr. Kurt Baker for all of 
his help with this project. He was truly instrumental in guiding me through this process. 
I would also like to express my appreciation to my family, who have been very 
supportive throughout my graduate school career. Without their emotional and financial 
assistance, this pinnacle would have never been a reality for me. 
111 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .iii
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS .iv
 
LIST OF TABLES vi
 
CHAPTER
 
1 INTRODUCTION 1
 
Coping 1
 
Models of Stress 3
 
Assessments and Determinants of Coping 4
 
Nontraditional Students 6
 
Gender 8
 
2 METHOD 11
 
Participants 11
 
Design 11
 
Instrument. 11
 
Procedure 13
 
3 RESULTS 15
 
4 DISCUSSION 19
 
REFERENCES 23
 
APPENDICES 27
 
Appendix A: Participation Consent Form 28
 
IV 
Appendix B: Demographic Information Sheet.. 29
 
Appendix C: Participant Instructions 30
 
v
 
LIST OF TABLES
 
TABLE PAGE 
1 Summary ofMeans and Standard Deviations for 
Coping Strategies and TraditionallNontraditional 
Student 16 
2 Summary ofMeans and Standard Deviations for Gender 
and Coping Strategies 18 
VI 
1 
CHAPTER 1 
INTRODUCTION 
With a constant barrage of role ambiguity, time pressures, and seemingly 
never-ending social problems affecting daily life, stress has become a significant aspect 
of many individuals' existence. The stress response appears to have developed so that 
individuals can exercise some degree of control in physically and mentally threatening 
situations (paterson & Neufeld, 1995). Researchers have recognized the potentially 
powerful and pervasive impact that stress can have upon both an individual's behavior 
and physiology. Stressful life events increase the possibility that physical illness as well 
as psychological ailments will emerge. Supportive evidence, however, is somewhat 
contradictory. A positive relationship between the amount and severity of stress in an 
individual's life and declining health have been continually noted and investigated for 
years (pelletier & Herzing, 1989; Steptoe, 1989). On the other hand, Kessler, Price, and 
Wortman (1985) demonstrated that not all individuals who find themselves confronting 
burdensome and draining life stressors will automatically become markedly affected. 
Thus, some individuals are more affected than others by stress. 
Copini 
While research into the association between individuals and stress has examined 
several different areas, the concept ofcoping has become increasingly recognized as one 
of the major interceding variables involved in the effects of stress. Broadly speaking, 
coping involves an individual's cognitive and behavioral actions used to manage the 
demands, both internal and external, of a stressful or interrupting occurrence that may 
strain one's capacity to adjust (Zeidner, 1994). A commonly held notion is that how 
individuals experience and cope with daily problems will ultimately determine the extent 
to which they are affected (Terry, 1994). 
Coping strategies playa significant role in adapting to stressful life events. 
Coping is viewed as a stabilizing factor that can aid individuals in sustaining 
2 
psychosocial adaptation during perceived periods of stress (Abella & Hesslin, 1989; 
Valentiner, Holahan, & Moos, 1984). Several different styles of coping strategies have 
differential effects on emotions and emotional outcomes (Cantazaro & Greenwood, 
1994). For example, some coping strategies are considered to be active, in that 
individuals confront a problem or source of stress directly. Active coping strategies are 
often seen as having a more positive effect on an individual's well-being. However, other 
coping strategies may entail avoiding or not confronting a specific stressor, thereby 
leading, in the long run, to a poorer or meager adaptation to stress. Thus, coping style 
may dictate successful adaptation to stress. 
When examining the nature of the relationship between stress and coping, the 
academic environment readily presents itself as a context wrought with day-to-day 
challenges and demanding stimuli directed at the individual student. During their 
experience in the university setting, adults of all ages must learn to live and cope with 
anxiety related to attending lectures, completing assignments, and taking tests. Such 
anxiety results in stress related to feeling overloaded, being pressured for time, having 
divided loyalties, and experiencing challenges to self-confidence. The relationship 
between stressful events and coping suggests that how these students deal, or cope, with 
these unsettling situations will interact with intellectual ability to affect performance. 
Because of the situation created by the academic environment, university students are a 
prime accessible population to study when examining stress and coping. 
Certain coping strategies utilized in academic environments have a tendency to 
buffer the effects of daily academic challenges, allowing for less susceptibility to the 
adverse impact of continuous environmental stressors. As many as 84% of college 
students applying for mental health services report presenting problems arising from 
stressful circumstances and difficulties coping with these circumstances (Cantanzaro & 
Greenwood, 1994). A better understanding of the relationship between coping and 
3 
academic related stress could help influence the coping strategies students utilize in 
dealing with academic stressors and assist them in employing the most adaptive response. 
Models of Stress 
The experience of stressful life events is an important factor in individual 
functioning. Because of its importance in both psychological and physiological health, a 
sizable amount of research has been directed at the issues surrounding the concept of 
stress. It is generally believed that the stress response developed as an adaptive measure 
for individuals to use in exercising control in physically or mentally threatening 
situations. The link between stress responses and one's perceived control over a 
particular situation has become a central issue in stress research (Paterson & Neufeld, 
1995; Valentiner et aI., 1994). The process of coping appears to be the intermediate 
variable that is most important in this relationship; hence, the central aspect of situational 
control is dependent on the coping response. 
Lazarus and Folkman (1984) proposed a transactional model of stress to describe 
the dynamic interaction between an individual's cognitive assessment of a situation and 
the coping response which follows. In their paradigm, the primary appraisal of 
harm/loss, threat or challenge influences one's coping response to a stressful event. They 
further postulated that cognitive appraisals are influenced by such factors as values, 
goals, and motivation/personal commitment. Thus, stress is a process or transaction 
between the individual and the environment, leaving the actual stimulus to be regarded as 
simply one aspect among many. They conclude that cognitive appraisals explain why 
individuals express differences in assessments and reactions to similar stressful events. 
Santiago-Rivera, Bernstein, and Gard (1995) followed up on the transactional 
model of stress by proposing an additional element known as "centrality." This concept 
takes the dynamic person-environment interaction into account and attempts to explain 
individual differences in the appraisal of and reactions to similar life events. Centrality is 
the degree of importance given to certain fundamental issues that are triggered by 
4 
situations and events. Such fundamental issues are formed through the dynamic 
developmental processes encompassing an individual's cumulative life experience. Thus, 
centrality is a factor that is associated with an individual and contributes to the type of 
cognitive appraisal that is made. When using the central or fundamental issue of 
"achievement" within an undergraduate college population, it was found that this central 
issue interacted with or seemed to elicit a "challenge" oriented cognitive appraisal from 
the students, thereby being more predictive of direct and planned coping strategies. 
Thus, Santiago-Rivera et al. (1995) concluded that college students who identify 
achievement as highly important seem to use more problem-solving or task-oriented 
coping strategies when faced with a stressful situation appraised as challenging. 
When examining the relationship between stressful environments and situational 
control, an individual's perception ofhaving situational control seems to be contingent on 
the availability of a choice between different coping options (paterson & Neufeld, 1995). 
Having available choices between different options seems to help in reducing the impact 
ofa stressor and seems to be somewhat more adaptive. A primary determinant of 
anticipatory stress is the extent of the impact of the least threatening of the alternatives 
available. Therefore, individuals will tend to select and act upon the coping option with 
the most pleasing outcome, simply because less attractive options offer them relatively 
little sanctuary from the perceived threat of the stressor and its consequence. 
Assessments and Determinants of Coping 
Endler and Parker (1994) have differentiated among three basic stress coping 
styles: task-oriented, emotion-oriented, and avoidance coping. Task-oriented coping or 
"approach" coping as it is sometimes called, refers to managing or solving a problem by 
removing or taking some sort of action upon the stressor. Emotion-oriented coping refers 
to regulating, reducing or eliminating the emotional arousal surrounding the stressor. 
Avoidance strategies refer to managing stress by either person-oriented strategies, which 
5 
involve the seeking of others in order to evade a task, or engaging in a nonrelevant task in 
order to avoid a target task. 
In general, more "approach" or task-oriented coping strategies are associated with 
better psychological outcomes and greater adaptability. Emotion-oriented and avoidance 
coping, on the other hand, are often equated with poorer outcomes, simply because they 
often fail to address the stressful stimulus (Holahan & Moos, 1987). 
Some investigators have proposed that an individual's choice ofcoping response 
is heavily influenced by social support. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) define social 
support as the resources an individual "draws on in order to cope" (p. 158). Thus, social 
support can be viewed as a fonn of coping assistance. For example, advice and 
encouragement from a friend or companion could, perhaps, increase the likelihood that 
an individual will rely on logical analysis, infonnation seeking, or active 
problem-solving. Holahan and Moos (1990) found that individuals with more personal 
and social resources were more likely to rely on approach or task-oriented coping styles 
and less likely to use avoidance coping. 
Valentiner et al. (1994), however, proposed that the adaptive significance of 
approach or task-oriented coping versus avoidant and emotion-oriented coping strategies 
may depend on the controllability of the stressors that are confronted. Event 
controllability may lessen the role ofcoping in reaction to stress by both shaping the 
choice of one's coping strategies, thereby influencing outcomes. Evidence suggests that 
when stressors are viewed as more controllable, individuals will utilize more approach or 
task-oriented strategies and less avoidance or emotion-oriented coping. Moreover, it is 
suggested that psychological outcomes are influenced by the fit between appraisals of 
controllability and the choice of coping strategies. 
Head and Lindsey (1987) asserted how an individual experiences and copes with 
environmental stressors is multiply detennined and is a function of the ongoing 
transaction between the individual and environment, contextual and personal 
6 
detenninants of coping behaviors, and anxiety. University environments and 
examination situations are commonly viewed as rich opportunities and promising areas 
of research for understanding how people cope with ego-threatening social evaluations or 
how coping impacts affective and cognitive outcomes. Zeidner (1994) examined the 
coping strategies that were utilized by undergraduate college students in an examination 
situation. Data revealed that utilizing task-oriented coping behaviors in a stressful 
situation tended to buffer the effects of day-to-day academic challenges and anxiety in 
the college community. However, emotion-oriented coping behaviors were typically 
associated with poor adaptation to stress, mainly because such strategies often involve a 
total failure to ever confront the stressful event. Thus, the study concluded that particular 
coping responses were predictive of different levels of emotions (namely, anxiety level) 
and adaptive outcomes (enhanced overall coping to day-to-day hassles). 
Dispositional variables have also been explored in relation to choice of coping 
responses among college students. Cantazaro and Greenwood (1994) examined coping 
responses in relation to negative moods, negative expectancies, and negative life events. 
Active or task-oriented coping responses were found to be utilized more frequently with 
positive moods, expectancies, and life events, whereas more avoidant responses seemed 
to be prevalent with college students experiencing negative moods, expectancies, and life 
events. Staats, Atha, and Isham (1990) found that negative affect declines as young to 
middle-aged adults grow older. They argued that cognitive appraisal and coping skills 
are enhanced as a function of experience. 
Nontraditional Students 
Over the previous decade, the number of older students pursuing higher 
education has been surpassing that of younger, more traditional aged students (Heretick 
& Doyle, 1987; United States Department ofEducation, 2000). Between 1990 and 1997, 
the United States Department ofEducation estimated that enrollment of persons 25 years 
of age and older grew by 6%, a trend expected to continue throughout the new decade. 
7 
Thus, the university system is turning its attention towards identifying the needs, 
concerns, and interests of a group known as "nontraditional" students. Nontraditional 
students are individuals 25 years of age and older who are undertaking a college 
education for the first time or returning to college for additional undergraduate work 
(Yarbrough & Schaffer, 1990). 
In examining the relationship between nontraditional and traditional students, 
Kaswonn (1982) asserted that nontraditional students have different psychological, 
psychosocial, and behavioral needs. Although nontraditional and traditional students 
share some similar needs, nontraditional students are more often confronted with 
problems relating to multiple life roles and the dilemmas that often result from the roles 
of spouse, parent, and employee. With a variety of simultaneous life roles, it is not 
uncommon for the nontraditional student to experience substantial amounts of stress 
related to role confusion and divided loyalties. Query, Parry, and Flint (1992) found that 
unmoderated stress can result in feelings of anger, frustration, guilt, and even depression. 
In examining the relationship between age and vulnerability to stress in a 
university population, Clarke (1995) found older students to be significantly more 
vulnerable to the effects of stress than younger students. The researcher concluded that 
despite positive reports as to the benefits oflife experience (Staats et al., 1990), older 
students tended to have worse health habits such as diet and significantly less social 
support than younger students, thus making them significantly more vulnerable to stress. 
Yarbrough and Schaffer (1990) found that nontraditional students tend to have 
more anxiety over numerous aspects of the college experience than traditional students. 
The researchers assert that the heightened anxiety level appears to be related to a lack of 
confidence in current academic skills and to fear relating to a decline in ability since last 
attending school. Although nontraditional students acquire valuable skills through more 
varied life experiences, these skills are not always congruent with those measured in 
academia. 
8 
University counseling centers and other intervention specialists would greatly 
benefit from the exploration into the relationship between stress and coping strategies 
within this particular subpopulation. By increasing our knowledge of the coping 
responses most often utilized by nontraditional students as well as traditional college 
students, individualized stress-management interventions and counseling could be 
enhanced, thereby allowing for more positive and adaptive outcomes within the academic 
environment. 
Gender 
Ptacek, Smith, and Zanas (1992) reported that a current trend in coping research 
encompasses the issue of gender. Two major hypotheses have directed much of the 
gender-related research. The socialization hypothesis is founded on the general notion 
that women and men are socialized to deal with stressful situations in different ways. It 
is suggested that due to sex role stereotypes and differing role expectations, men are 
socialized to deal with stress instrumentally, while women tend to express more emotion 
and engage in emotion-focused coping methods. Banyard and Graham-Bermann (1987) 
assert that traditional sex-role socialization instructs women to be more frequently 
passive and accepting of stressful situations than men. 
Both Folkman and Lazarus (1980) and Billings and Moos (1981) assert a second 
hypothesis about gender differences which focuses on the structural aspects of the 
environment. Specifically, gender differences in coping may be linked to contrasts in the 
different kinds of stressors with which women and men are confronted. Since it is 
believed that specific categories of stressful situations require distinctive methods of 
coping, women and men should appear to cope differently. Women often experience 
more stress related to health and family while men often experience more stress related 
to work and finances. When confronting the stress, men often demonstrate more active, 
direct coping while women engage in more passive, emotion-focused coping and social 
support (Hamilton & Fagot, 1988; Stone & Neale, 1984). 
9 
However, when examining the processes involved in coping with stress, 
Frydenberg and Lewis (1993) noted that a number of strategies are specifically utilized to 
different extents by male students and female students as early as adolescence. Female 
adolescents have a tendency to use more social support, direct action, and more 
emotional expression. Additionally, female adolescents generally attempt to problem 
solve and are more self-reliant. Male adolescents, on the other hand, use more 
withdrawal and acceptance when confronted with stress. 
When examining the amounts of stress experienced by both male and female 
students at the academic level, Yarbrough and Schaffer (1990) found that nontraditional 
female students, in particular, often face more numerous and conflicting roles. This 
stress appears to be related to the role confusion often created from balancing the 
responsibilities of mother, employee, and homemaker (Yarbrough & Schaffer, 1990). 
Rationale 
Recently, the concept of coping has become increasingly recognized as a major 
variable involved with stress. An individual's coping response to stressful life events can 
be a critical component in determining the impact of the event upon one's functioning. 
Therefore, it appears that one's style ofcoping can be either adaptive in addressing 
stressful situations or inadequate and predictive of poor situational outcomes. 
By obtaining knowledge about the differing coping strategies being utilized by 
traditional and nontraditional students, perhaps the most beneficial strategies and 
productive coping responses to stress could be employed to achieve more adaptive and 
positive outcomes. Such an approach would allow university students and university 
intervention specialists to employ a more preventative approach to aversive stress 
outcomes, thereby providing vast implications for stress management and other 
combative strategies. 
The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationships between 
stress and coping strategies in a university population. Although all students experience 
10 
some degree of stress and engage in subsequent coping strategies, the study specifically 
focused on which strategies were being utilized by traditional and nontraditional 
students. Additionally, possible gender differences in coping strategies were examined. 
Four hypotheses were investigated: 
1. Nontraditional students will utilize active or task-oriented coping strategies 
more often than traditional students. 
2. Traditional students will utilize avoidance coping strategies more often than 
nontraditional students. 
3. Traditional students will utilize more emotion-oriented coping strategies than 
nontraditional students. 
4. Male students, regardless of traditional or nontraditional status, will utilize 
more task-oriented coping strategies, while both traditional and nontraditional female 
students will utilize more emotion-oriented and avoidance-coping strategies. 
11 
CHAPTER 2 
METHOD 
Participants 
Participants were 86 undergraduate student volunteers: 50 traditional students 
(25 men and 25 women) and 36 nontraditional students (15 men and 21 women) who 
were enrolled in introductory and developmental psychology classes at Emporia State 
University in Emporia, Kansas. Traditional students were defined as those individuals 
who were under 25 years of age and did not have children. Nontraditional students were 
defined as one or more of the following: (a) those individuals who were 25 years ofage 
or older; (b) individuals who had not undertaken formal education for a minimum of 2 
years; or (c) individuals who had children. Participants received class points for 
participation. 
Desi~ 
The independent variables for this study were student status (traditional or 
nontraditional) and gender. The dependent variable was the participant's score on the 
task, emotion, and avoidance-oriented coping subscales comprising the Coping Inventory 
for Stressful Situations. 
Instrument 
The Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) was used to assess three 
different coping strategies consisting oftask-oriented coping, emotion-oriented coping, 
and avoidance coping. Developed by Endler and Parker (1990), the CISS measures 
multiple dimensions of coping and is based on their original instrument called the 
Multidimensional Coping Inventory. The CISS is a 48-item scale and consists of three 
16-item scales assessing task, emotion, and avoidance-oriented coping. Two additional 
subscales are provided in the avoidance-oriented scale which assess methods of coping 
by using distraction and social diversion. The normative samples consisted of 537 
English speaking North American adults (249 males and 288 females), 1242 English 
12 
speaking North American undergraduates (471 males and 771 females), and 302 
psychiatric inpatients (164 males and 138 females). Participants are asked to indicate 
how much they engage in various behaviors when confronting a stressful or upsetting 
situation. Items are assessed on a 1 (Not at All) to 5 (Very Much) Likert scale. 
Scores from the three coping subscales of the CISS are created by summing 
together the weighted responses to the items endorsing each subscale from participants' 
answer sheets. Scores for each subscale range from 16 to 80. Higher scores indicate 
greater endorsement of the coping strategy represented by the subscale. The total CISS 
score is converted to a standard I-score (M = 50, Sl2 = 10) using a hand scored profile 
form created by the test publisher to enable comparisons between the different coping 
styles. 
The CISS is reliable across a variety of different situations and populations and 
valid for the three coping subscales. The CISS has demonstrated eight week test-retest 
coefficients for the task, emotion, and avoidance subscales of.74, .66, and .68, 
respectively (Endler & Parker, 1994). Cronbach alphas have been found to range from 
.76 to .91. Its factor analytic structure has proven to be consistent for adolescents, 
college students, normal adults, and psychiatric groups. Factor analyses, utilizing a 
principal components analysis with a varimax rotation for each sample, rendered 
congruence coefficients for the three subscales of coping to be above 0.97, which 
suggests that factor structures are consistent across populations (Endler & Parker, 1990). 
The supplement to the Thirteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook (1999) reports that 
the CISS is the best instrument of its kind available for assessing the multidimensions of 
coping, due specifically to its reliability and factor structure. 
In addition to the CISS, a demographic form requesting information concerning 
age, gender, classification, marital status, and number of children was used in order to 
better verify the aforementioned criteria necessary for participation in this study. 
Students were requested not to place their names on the form. 
13 
Procedure 
Potential participants were recruited through the use of posted sign-up sheets. 
Interested individuals signed up for one of four group meetings scheduled at different 
times on the same day and at the same location. Each sign-up sheet listed the specific 
criteria required of each participant to be included in a particular group meeting. Thus, 
individual participants were required to meet the criteria for only one of the four groups: 
(a) male, less than 25 years of age, no children; (b) female, less than 25 years of age, no 
children; (c) male, at least 25 years of age and/or who has not undertaken formal 
education for two years and/or who has children; (d) female, at least 25 years of age 
and/or who has not undertaken formal education for two years and/or who has children. 
The latter two groups consisted of criteria relevant to meeting the definition of 
'nontraditional student' for the purposes of the present study. Each sign-up sheet 
recruited a range of 15 to 25 participants for each group meeting. 
Participants later attended the particular group meeting for which they signed up. 
Each student was given an informed consent form and instructed to read the printed 
directions on the form (see Appendix A). Students willing to participate in the study 
signed and returned the consent form to the researcher. After all ofthe consent forms 
had been returned to the researcher, all participants were given a booklet which included 
a demographic form on page one (see Appendix B), directions for the CISS (see 
Appendix C), and the CISS (not included due to copyright laws). Each booklet contained 
a participant identification number in the upper right comer of the page. The researcher 
instructed all participants to complete the booklet at their own pace, beginning with the 
first page of the booklet. Participants were informed that booklets would be collected by 
the researcher when everyone had finished. 
After booklets had been collected, participants were asked not to discuss any 
events that took place in the group meeting (neither the general procedure nor the booklet 
14 
material) with any other individuals. Individuals were then thanked for their time, each 
given their research participation validation slip, and dismissed. 
All directions and instructions from the researcher were delivered to the 
participants in the group meeting, from a previously prepared script. No time limits were 
imposed for each group meeting, but the testing procedure required approximately 20 
minutes for the total administration. 
15 
CHAPTER 3 
RESULTS 
A series of independent-samples 1tests were performed to evaluate the four 
hypotheses. Table 1 lists means and standard deviations derived from analyses with 
coping strategies and traditional/nontraditional students. 
A 1 test was conducted to evaluate Hypothesis 1 that nontraditional students 
would utilize active or task-oriented coping strategies more often than traditional 
students. The 1test revealed no significant difference between these two groups, 1(84) = 
-.81, Il = .42. Thus, the nontraditional students in this sample did not utilize more active 
or task-oriented strategies than traditional students. 
A 1test was conducted to evaluate Hypothesis 2 that traditional students would 
utilize avoidance coping strategies more often than non-traditional students. The results 
were significant, 1(84) = 2.99, Il < .01, indicating traditional students utilized more 
avoidance coping strategies than did nontraditional students, thus supporting Hypothesis 
2. 
To evaluate Hypothesis 3 that traditional students would utilize more 
emotion-oriented coping strategies than nontraditional students, a 1test was utilized. The 
test revealed no significant difference between these two groups, 1(84) = 1.72, Il = .09. 
Thus, traditional students did not utilize more emotion-oriented coping strategies than 
nontraditional students. 
1tests were utilized to investigate the final hypothesis that male students, 
regardless of traditional or nontraditional status, would utilize more task-oriented coping 
strategies than women, while both traditional and nontraditional female students would 
utilize more emotion-oriented and avoidance-coping strategies than men. The analysis 
conducted to explore the relationship between gender and task-oriented coping strategies 
revealed no significant difference between genders 1(84) = -.04, Il = .97. Thus, male 
16 
Table 1 
Summary ofMeans and Standard Deviations for Coping Strategies and Traditional 
and Nontraditional Students 
Coping Strategy n M SD. 
Task-Oriented 
Traditional 50 55 10.8 
Nontraditional 36 57 10.1 
Avoidance 
Traditional 50 48 9.0 
Nontraditional 36 42 9.1 
Emotion-Oriented 
Traditional 50 48 9.3 
Nontraditional 36 44 12.0 
17 
students did not utilize more task-oriented coping strategies than female students. The 
analysis exploring the relationship between gender and emotion-oriented coping 
revealed, no significant difference between these two variables, 1(84) = 1.04, Jl = .30, 
suggesting female students did not utilize emotion-oriented coping more than male 
students. Finally, a 1test exploring the relationship between gender and avoidance 
coping revealed no significant difference, 1(84) = 1.23, Jl = .22, indicating female 
students did not utilize avoidance-coping strategies more than male students. Table 2 
summarizes the descriptive statistics for this series of analyses. 
18 
Table 2 
Summary ofMeans and Standard Deviations for Gender and Coping Strategies 
Coping Strategy n. M Sl2 
Task-Oriented 
Men 40 56 10.2 
Women 46 56 10.9 
Emotion-Oriented 
Men 40 47 9.4 
Women 46 45 11.7 
Avoidance 
Men 40 47 9.1 
Women 46 45 9.7 
19 
CHAPTER 4 
DISCUSSION 
Statistical results provided support for only one of the proposed relationships 
between coping style and traditional and nontraditional status. Additionally, no 
significant relationship was found between gender and coping strategy. In fact, scores for 
groups of participants were near the norm for the CISS. Thus, the overall relationship 
between nontraditional students, gender, and coping appears to be less direct than 
predicted. 
Support was not found for Hypothesis 1, the prediction that nontraditional 
students would utilize more active or task-oriented coping strategies than traditional 
students. Despite having had more experiences with varied life stressors, nontraditional 
students may tend to have more anxiety over the numerous aspects that accompany the 
college experience than traditional students. In fact, Yarbrough and Schaffer (1990) 
found that nontraditional students often face apprehensions related to a lack of 
confidence in their current academic skills, as well as a fear of decline in ability since 
their last academic experience. Perhaps the same insecurities and apprehensions relating 
to the college experience led the participants involved in the current study to engage in 
less optimal coping strategies than might have been predicted by their life experience. 
Thus, despite having acquired experiential-based coping skills in other realms of life, 
nontraditional students' skills might not necessarily be congruent with the skills required 
to optimally manage the associated stressors of academia. 
Additionally, since nontraditional students are more often burdened with 
managing multiple roles while engaged in educational pursuits, the notion of sufficient 
social support becomes important. Clarke (1995) concluded that older students often 
have less social support than younger students, a circumstance which can leave them 
more vulnerable to the effects of stress. Thus, despite nontraditional students' varied life 
20 
experiences with stressors, one can theorize that a lack of social resources while trying to 
negotiate aspects ofacademia might lead to more debilitated coping strategies than might 
be expected. 
As predicted by Hypothesis 2, traditional students reported utilizing avoidant 
coping strategies more often than did nontraditional students. Thus, despite the lack ofa 
significant relationship between nontraditional students and a greater utilization of task­
 oriented responses, as predicted in Hypothesis 1, traditional students did report utilizing 
more avoidant strategies, and thereby less adaptive strategies, than nontraditional 
students when confronted by stressful situations. More specifically, traditional students 
endorsed stress management techniques which dealt with either utilizing others in order 
to avoid specific tasks or avoiding tasks altogether by engaging in other non-relevant 
activities. Santiago-Rivera et al. (1995) proposed that the accumulation of life 
experience by individuals accounts for the degree of importance given to certain 
fundamental issues. Specifically, life experience is related to the cognitive appraisal of 
value, motivation, and commitment directed to specific topics and issues. Furthermore, 
they concluded that college students who identify achievement as highly important seem 
to use more direct problem-solving and task-oriented coping strategies when facing 
stressful situations. Thus, perhaps the circumstance of more limited life experience for 
traditional students, when compared to nontraditional students, and its relationship to 
achievement motivation, accounts for greater utilization of less adaptive coping 
strategies. 
Hypothesis 3, which proposed a greater utilization by traditional students of 
emotion-oriented coping strategies, was not supported. Thus, traditional students did not 
endorse coping strategies that regulate, reduce or eliminate the emotional arousal 
surrounding stressors more often than nontraditional students. The results ofHypothesis 
3, however, make more sense when viewed in light ofthe results ofHypothesis 2. 
Holahan and Moos (1990) relate that emotion-oriented and avoidance coping strategies 
21 
are both equated with less adaptive outcomes in coping with stress, simply because both 
strategies fail to directly address the stressful stimulus. Thus, a lack ofsupport for the 
proposed relationship in Hypothesis 3 does not necessarily indicate that traditional 
students are not utilizing less adaptive coping strategies than nontraditional students. In 
fact, since results from Hypothesis 2 indicate that traditional students are utilizing more 
avoidant strategies than nontraditional students, traditional students may simply be using 
avoidant strategies over emotional strategies. 
Statistical results offered no support for Hypothesis 4, which proposed that male 
students, regardless of traditional or nontraditional status, would utilize more 
task-oriented coping than would female students of either status. Thus, Ptacek, Smith 
and Zanas (1992) and Banyard and Graham-Bermann's (1987) discussions of the 
socialization hypothesis and the general notion that men are socialized to deal with 
stressful situations in a more directive or action-oriented manner than women did not 
receive support within the present study. 
Considering the current trends in American society, however, perhaps the 
socialization hypothesis needs to be reformulated. Women have moved into the once 
male-dominated work force at a dramatic pace, leaving many of the roles and 
responsibilities associated with the stereotypical female either behind or left to 
negotiation by both sexes. Thus, coping styles associated with gender due to the norms 
asserted by society may not have held true for participants in the current study. One can 
theorize that large-scale contextual shifts by the sexes could very well entail some shifts 
in coping strategies for both men and women. 
Although some variation between coping style was found within the present 
study, the relationship between the stress response and the process of coping within this 
university population may have limited generalization. Future research investigating this 
area should consider including a greater number of participants within each group. 
Students meeting the criteria for the nontraditional conditions were more difficult to 
22 
secure in this study. This was especially the case with nontraditional males; only 15 
participated in the study. 
Lack of differences between traditional and nontraditional students and their 
coping styles found in this study does not lessen the importance of this research area for 
university programs seeking to provide services for students. The stress response is 
believed to have developed as an adaptive mechanism for individuals to utilize in 
exercising some control in mentally threatening environments and the process of coping 
seems to be a very important interceding variable within this process. University 
counseling centers will undoubtedly continue to be integral structures for students 
seeking to better manage the reality of stress. Thus, future research concerning coping 
should continue to concentrate on the variables which affect a student's coping response 
to stress. Specifically, this research should investigate individual variables influencing 
and contributing to the coping response. Perhaps, integrating other psychometric 
measures such as the Beck Depression Inventory, California Personality Inventory, or 
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 could provide more information into the 
specific variables governing particular coping strategies. 
_
 23 
REFERENCES 
Abella, R, & Heslin, R (1989). Appraisal processes, coping, and the regulation 
of stress-related emotions in a college examination. Basic and Applied Social 
Psychology, 10, 311-327. 
Banyard, VL., & Graham-Bermann, S.A. (1993). Can women cope: A gender 
analysis of theories of coping with stress. Psycholoi:Y ofWomen Quarterly, 17, 303-318. 
Billings, A.G., & Moos, RH. (1981). The role of coping responses and social 
resources in attenuating the stress of life events. Journal ofBehavioral Medicine, 4, 
139-157. 
Catanzaro, S.J., & Greenwood, G. (1994). Expectancies for negative mood 
regulation, coping, and dysphoria among college students. Journal of Counseling 
Psychology, 41, 34-44. 
Clarke, D.E. (1995). Vulnerability to stress as a function of age, sex, locus of 
control, hardiness and Type A personality. Social Behavior and Personality, 23, 285-286. 
Endler, N.S., & Parker, J.D. (1990). Copim~ Inventory for Stressful Situations 
(CISS): Manual. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems. 
Endler, N.S., & Parker, J.D. (1994). Assessment of multidimensional coping: 
Task, emotion, and avoidance strategies. Psychological Assessment, 6, 50-60. 
Folkman, S., & Lazarus, RS. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-age 
community sample. Journal ofHealth and Social Behavior, 21,219-239. 
Frydenberg, E., & Lewis, R (1993). Boys play sports and girls turn to each other: 
Age, gender and ethnicity as determinants of coping. Journal of Adolescence, 16, 
253-266. 
Hamilton, S., & Fagot, 8.1. (1988). Chronic stress and coping styles: A 
comparison of male and female undergraduates. Journal of Personality and Social 
Psychology, 55, 819-823. 
..----_ .. _--_. 
24 
Head, L.Q., & Lindsey, J.D. (1987). Anxiety and the university student: A brief 
review of the professional literature. Colle~ Student Journal, 28, 176-182. 
Heretick, D.M., & Doyle M.B. (1986). Orienting the re-entry student: A holistic 
approach. Colle~ Student Journal. 27, 55-60. 
Holahan, C.J., & Moos, RH. (1987). Personal and contextual determinants of 
coping strategies. Journal ofPersonality and Social PsYCholoiY, 52, 946-955. 
Holahan, C.J., & Moos, RH. (1990). Life stressors, resistance factors and 
improved psychological functioning: An extension of the stress resistance paradigm. 
Journal ofPersonality and Social psycholoiY, 58, 909-917. 
Kasworm, C. (1982). Lifespan differences between student groupings. Journal of 
Colle~ Student Personnel, 23, 425-428. 
Kessler, R.C., Price, R H., & Wortman, C.B. (1985). Social factors in 
psychopathology: Stress, social support, and coping processes. Annual Review of 
PsycholoGY, 36, 531-572. 
Kohn, P.M., Lafreniere, K., & Gurevich, M. (1991). Hassles, health, and 
personality. Journal ofPersonality and Social PsycholoiY, 61, 478-482. 
Lazarus, RS., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and copini. New York: 
Springer. 
Noble, K.A. (1987). Non-traditional students at the Uniyersity of Ottawa: 
Profile, prolUammes, and pfQjections of enrollment (Research Rep. No. 143). Ontario, 
Canada: University of Ottawa. 
Paterson, RJ., & Neufeld, RW. (1995). What are my options?: Influences of 
choice availability on stress and the perception of control. Journal ofResearch in 
Personality,29, 145-167. 
Pelletier, K.R, & Herzing, D.L. (1988). Psychoneuroimmunology: Toward a 
mindbody model. Advances, 5, 26-56. 
25 
Plake, B.S., & Impara, J.e. (Eds.). (1999). The supplement to the Thirteenth 
Mental Measurements Yearbook. Lincoln, Nebraska: Buros Institute ofMental 
Measurements of The University ofNebraska-Lincoln. 
Ptacek, J.T., Smith, RE., & Zanas, J. (1992). Gender, appraisal, and coping: A 
longitudinal analysis. Journal ofPersonality, 60, 747-770. 
Query, lL., Parry, D., & Flint, L.l (1992). The relationship among social 
support, communication competence, and cognitive depression for nontraditional 
students. Journal ofApplied Communication Research, 20, 78-92. 
Santiago-Rivera, A.L., Berstein, B.L., & Gard, T.L. (1995). The importance of 
achievement and the appraisal of stressful events as predictors ofcoping. Journal of 
Colle~e Student Development. 36, 374-383. 
Staats, S., Atha, G., & Isham, J. (1990). Variations in expected affect in young 
and middle-aged adults. Journal of Genetic PsYcholo~, 151, 429-438. 
Steptoe, A. (1989). Coping and psychophysiological reactions. Advanced 
behavior research therapy Volume II (pp. 259-270). London: Pergamon Press. 
Stone, A.A., & Neale, J.M. (1984). New measure of daily coping: Development 
and preliminary results. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psycholo~, 46, 892-906. 
Terry, D.l (1994). Determinants of coping: The role of stable and situational 
factors. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo~, 66,895-909. 
United States Department ofEducation (2000). National Center for Education 
Statistics: Fast facts. [On-line]. Available: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfactsldisplay.asp. 
Valentiner, D.P., Holahan, e.l, & Moos, RH. (1994). Social support, appraisals 
ofevent controllability, and coping: An integrative model. Journal ofPersonality and 
Social PsYcholo~, 66, 1094-1102. 
Yarbrough, D.W., & Schaffer, lL. (1990). A comparison of school-related 
anxiety experienced by nontraditional versus traditional students. Colle~e Student 
Journal, 24, 81-90. 
26 
Zeidner, M. (1994). Personal and contextual determinants of coping and anxiety 
in an evaluative situation: A prosPective study. Personality and Indiyidual Differences, 
l.6... 899-918. 
S3::JlaN3:ddV 
28 
APPENDIX A 
Participation Consent Form 
Read this consent form. If you have any questions ask the experimenter and she will 
answer the question. 
You are invited to participate in a study investigating the relationship between stress and 
individual coping styles. Your participation will entail completing the Coping Inventory 
for Stressful Situations (CISS)-Adult form, a 48-item inventory assessing various coping 
styles, and a 5-item demographic information sheet. 
Information Obtained in this study will be identified only by code number. Your name 
will be used only to indicate that you participated in the study and received extra credit 
for participating. Extra credit will be given to subjects who complete the entire 
inventory. 
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. Should you wish to terminate 
your participation, you are welcome to do so at any point in the study. There is no risk or 
discomfort involved in completing the study. 
If you have any questions or comments about this study, feel free to ask the experimenter. 
If you have any additional questions, please contact Jennifer Burleson, 343-8185. 
Thank you for your participation. 
I , have read the above information and have decided to participate. 
(please print name) 
I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I may withdraw at any time 
without prejudice after signing this form should I choose to discontinue participation in 
this study. 
(signature of participant) (date) 
THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY 
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD FOR TREATMENT OF HUMAN SUBJECTS 
FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS. 
29 
APPENDIXB 
Participant Identification Number 
Demographic Infonnation Sheet 
_ 
Age:__ 
Sex: Male Female 
(circle one) 
Classification: Freshman Sophomore 
(circle one) 
Junior Senior 
Marital Status: Single Married 
(circle one) 
Divorced Widow 
Do you have children? Yes No 
(circle one) 
Comments: (Optional) 
30 
APPENDIXC
 
Participant Instructions
 
Your participation in this project will entail completing the Coping Inventory for 
Stressful Situations (CISS)- Adult form. The inventory consists of 48-items assessing 
various stress coping styles. Please flip the page and read the instructions listed at the top 
of the inventory before beginning. 
I, Jennifer Rebecca Burleson, hereby submit this thesis/report to Emporia State 
University as partial fulfillment of the requirements for an advanced degree. I agree that 
the Library of the University may make it available to use in accordance with its 
regulations governing materials of this type. I further agree that quoting, photocopying, 
or other reproduction of this document is allowed for private study, scholarship 
(including teaching) and research purposes of a nonprofit nature. No copying which 
involves potential financial gain will be allowed without the written permission of the 
author. 
./ 
Signature of Author 
July 28,2000 
Date 
An Investigation of the Coping Strategies 
Utilized by Traditional and Nontraditional 
Students 
Title ofThesis 
_------"'Cl....c.=.=.\..~ L\, 'l..O 0 () 
dite ReceIved 
f 
.//vJ"'/ 
~U
 ,