1 / 44

TRENDI IN PERSPEKTIVE SODOBNE PSIHOLOGIJE

TRENDI IN PERSPEKTIVE SODOBNE PSIHOLOGIJE. Pozitivna psihologija. Psihično blagostanje in zdravje. Osebnostni dejavniki soočanje s stresom in psihičnega zdravja. Pregled vsebine. Osebnost kot dejavnik stresa in soočanja Vloga nevroticizma Obrambnost Osebna čvrstost Resilientnost

torgny
Download Presentation

TRENDI IN PERSPEKTIVE SODOBNE PSIHOLOGIJE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TRENDI IN PERSPEKTIVE SODOBNE PSIHOLOGIJE Pozitivna psihologija

  2. Psihično blagostanje in zdravje • Osebnostni dejavniki soočanje s stresom in psihičnega zdravja

  3. Pregled vsebine • Osebnost kot dejavnik stresa in soočanja • Vloga nevroticizma • Obrambnost • Osebna čvrstost • Resilientnost • Osebnostni tipi rizičnosti za obolenja

  4. osebnost situacija Osebnost kot dejavnik soočanja s stresom • Modeli vloge osebnosti pri soočanju s stresom • Neposredni vpliv • Osebnostne lastnosti povzročajo stres • Stres povzroča osebnostne lastnosti • Posredni vpliv • Osebnost vpliva na druge faktorje, povezane s stresom • Kako vpliva stres na osebnost • Diferencialni model izpostavljenost – odzivanje (Bolger & Zuckerman, 1995) • Vpliv na izpostavljenost stresu • Vpliv na odzivanje na stres stres soočanje

  5. stres osebnost soočanje osebnost stres stres stres Kako vpliva osebnost na zdravje? • Interakcijski (moderacijski) model • osebnost posreduje med dogodki (npr. stresom) in soočanjem • Transakcijski model • osebnost vpliva na • soočanje • oceno dogajanja • dogajanje samo • Model zdravega vedenja • osebnost vpliva na zdrav slog obnašanja/življenja • Model bolnega vedenja • osebnost vpliva na zaznanje in tolmačenje telesnih znakov

  6. Osebnost in stres • Osebnost kot moderator stresa • Odpornost na stres • Vloga nevroticizma • Obrambnost • Osebna čvrstost • Resilientnost • Osebnostni tipi rizičnosti za obolenja

  7. Osebnostne dimenzije, stres in zdravje • Modeli vpliva osebnosti na zdravje • Osebna čvrstost, resilientnost in koherentnost • Temeljne dimenzije osebnosti in zdravje • Atribucijski slogi in optimizem • Tipi A, B, C in D • Spolno shematično obnašanje

  8. Temeljne dimenzije osebnosti in zdravje • Temeljne dimenzije so povezane s psihičnim in zdravjem • Pozitivni in negativni afekt • Visok pozitivni afekt • Nizek negativni afekt • ekstravertnost pozitivno • nevroticizem negativno, zlasti facet depresivnosti • Vestnost povezana z boljšim telesnim zdravjem in je prediktor dolgoživosti (Friedman in sod., 1995) • manj angažiranja v rizičnem obnašanju? • Nizka prijetnost in visok nevroticizem sta rizična dejavnika zdravja

  9. Vloga nevroticizma pri stresu • Nevroticizem: najbolj pogosto navajana osebnostna podlaga za razlike v stresnem obnašanju • Gunthert, K. C., Cohen, L. H. & Armeli, S. (1999). The Role of Neuroticism in Daily Stress and Coping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 77, No. 5, 1087-1100. • 216 študentov je vodilo dnevnik 14 dni • Instrumenti • Neuroticism Scale of the NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO—FFI; Costa & McCrae, 1992 ). • Stone and Neale's (1984) Daily Coping Assessment • Positive and Negative Affect Schedule–Expanded Form (PANAS—X; Watson & Clark, 1994 )

  10. Vloga nevroticizma pri stresu • Osebe z višjim nevroticizmom • Navajajo več negativnih stresnih dogodkov (Diener, Larsen, & Emmons, 1984; Hammen, 1991; Magnus et al., 1993 ; Ormel & Wohlfarth, 1991) in več dnevnih stresorjev, zlasti medosebnih in družinskih (Affleck et al., 1994 ; Bolger & Schilling, 1991 ; Bolger & Zuckerman, 1995 ; David et al., 1997 ; Suls, Martin, & David, 1998) • Bolj negativno reagirajo na stresno dogajanje (Innes & Kitto, 1989 ; Ormel & Wohlfarth, 1991 ; Parkes, 1990; Larsen & Ketelaar, 1989 , 1991 ) • Toda zakaj? • Ker imajo nižje pragove distresnega odziva • Ker uporabljajo manj uspešne načine soočanja

  11. Rezultati študije Gunthert in sod. • N signifikantno korelira z navajanjem več medosebnega stresa (r=0,20) • Medosebni dogodki povzročajo več stresa kot ne-medosebni, to pa je bolj izraženo pri +N • N se dalje povezuje z večjo oceno stresnosti, manj uspešnim soočanjem, sovražnim odzivanjem in samoobtoževanjem ter z odzivanjem z negativnim afektom

  12. Korelacije N s stresnimi dogodki, oceno stresa, soočanjem in emocionalnimi reakcijami

  13. Obrambnost in spoprijemanje • Obrambni slogi • Socialna zaželenost, obramba in potiskanje • Načini spoprijemanja (soočanja)

  14. Socialna zaželenost, obramba in potiskanje • Pauls, A. C. & Stemmler, G. (2003). Emotion Vol. 3,  No. 3,  284-302. • Represija – senzitizacija, represivnost – defenzivnost • Zaznavna obramba (Eriksen, 1966) • Byrne Repression-Sensitization scale (Bell & Byrne, 1978); premalo diskriminativna, previsoke korelacije z anksioznostjo (Weinberger, Schwartz, & Davidson, 1979). • Marlowe–Crowne (MC) Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) • Naravnanost odgovarjanja (“response set”, “respnse bias” ali osebnostna dimenzija? Verjetneje drugo.

  15. Represivnost, defenzivnost • “The history of the repressive–defensive coping style began with the development of the Byrne Repression-Sensitization scale (see Bell & Byrne, 1978). This measure evolved from the perceptual defense literature (e.g., Eriksen, 1966) in which repressors were defined as individuals who have heightened recognition thresholds for anxiety-provoking stimuli. But soon it emerged that the Byrne scale had limited discriminant validity because of its high correlation with trait anxiety measures (e.g., Weinberger, Schwartz, & Davidson, 1979). • The repressive coping research progressed with the development of the Marlowe–Crowne (MC) Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) that was originally constructed for the assessment of socially desirable responding as a response style. Within 4 years, however, Crowne and Marlowe (1964) recognized that their scale was primarily measuring a substantive individual difference dimension rather than a response bias. Since that time, a formidable body of research has demonstrated that high-MC scorers generally believe what they are reporting and attempt to behave accordingly (e.g., Derakshan & Eysenck, 1999; McCrae & Costa, 1983). However, this insight does not rule out that high-MC scorers can also exaggerate, cheat, and lie, if necessary, to ensure that others recognize their good character or to avoid social disapproval (e.g., Millham, 1974; Paulhus & John, 1998). • The core motive behind the excessively agreeable and conforming behavior of high-MC scorers seems to be the maintenance of an idealized self-concept, particularly by the defensive avoidance of negative affect such as anxiety or anger (Crowne & Marlowe, 1964, pp. 150, 190) and the prevention of threat to self-esteem from anticipated social rejection (e.g., Asendorpf & Scherer, 1983; Crowne, 1979, p. 169; Weinberger, 1990). • Thus, the MC scale seems to be appropriate for splitting low-trait anxiety scorers into true low-anxious individuals with low MC scale scores and repressors with high MC scale scores, and high-trait anxiety scorers into high-anxious individuals with low MC scale scores and defensive high-anxious individuals with high MC scale scores.” • “The main aim of the present study was to compare emotion responses of repressive–defensive copers during two socially evaluative contexts, conceptualized to induce fear and anger.” • Anksioznost x defenzivnost x emocije (strah, jeza)

  16. Represivnost, defenzivnost • Kombinacije: visoka anksioznost in visoka socialna zaželenost (defenzivnost), nizka anksioznost, visoka socialna zaželenost (represivnost) • So represorji resnično neanksiozni? • Je morda njihova anksioznost prikrita? • Se pojavlja pri njih nizka eksplicitna anksioznost, zato pa več fizioloških znakov anksioznosti, s katerimi ni mogoče manipulirati? • Strah • Jeza

  17. Jeza “The anger condition was composed of a 4-min rest period, a 1-min prestimulus period, and three anger induction periods, which were each followed by a 1-min data recording period and then by an emotion self-report. During the first induction period, participants were given a series of 15 items selected for high error rates from a test of general knowledge; they had to say loudly “I don't know” if they did not know an answer. After the second item, which was practically unsolvable, participants were asked to speak louder to compensate for an alleged malfunction in the intercom. After the eighth item, the experimenter interrupted again and said in an annoyed tone that he could not understand the participant. Upon completion of the task, participants were told they completed one third of the test items correctly. After the registration period, the experimenter claimed seeing movement artifacts and reminded the participant to sit quietly. The second induction period was composed of a mental arithmetic task in which participants silently and as quickly as possible subtracted 1, 2, 3, and so forth from 1,000 and the ongoing intermediate results. After 1 min, participants were stopped and told the current result. The experimenter commented on the participant's poor performance and gave her a new start number. One minute later, the participant was stopped again. Again, the result was claimed wrong. After filling out the emotion self-report form, the experimenter grumbled that the participant should state when she was ready, irrespective of whether she had done so or not. During the third induction period, an anagram task was presented on a monitor. After 6 of 12 anagrams, the experimenter quarreled in an angry voice with the participant for moving around in her chair. At the end of the anagram task, the experimenter rudely accused her of noncompliance. After data collection, participants were unhooked, led to another room for a postexperimental interview, and debriefed. “ Strah “The fear condition started with a 4-min rest period and a 1-min prestimulus period, followed by three fear induction periods and 1-min data recording epochs. The first induction period began with the instruction that participants were to give a 5-min speech on the topic “arguments pro and con the European Community,” which should be prepared during the next 5 min without taking notes. Participants were informed that the speech quality would be rated. The second induction period started with the announcement that “a speech expert is now coming into the room to take some notes during the speech.” Then the assistant walked into the experimental room, sat down in front of the participant, and prepared to take some notes while displaying a distant and reserved attitude. The third induction period should capture most clearly anticipatory fear. Participants were told that the time for speech preparation was over and that they should wait for a brief moment. During the ensuing minute, physiological data were recorded. Then the signal to start the speech was given. The speech period ended 4 min later, and the assistant left the room. Then the participant was asked to complete the emotion self-report form retrospectively for the time period immediately before the speech. Finally, participants were unhooked, led to another room for a postexperimental interview, and debriefed. “ Indukcija emocij

  18. Rezultati: indukcija emocij • Odziv v primerjavi s bazično vrednostjo • Fiziološke reakcije • Samoocene emocij

  19. Rezultati • Emocionalni odzivi med obema pogojema

  20. Rezultati: represivnost-defenzivnost • Interakcija anksioznost x defenzivnost pri jezi, ne pa pri strahu • Razlike v srčnem utripu • Najvišji pri represorjih, najnižji pri defenzivnosti

  21. Osebnostna čvrstost • angažiranost (odločenost) • izzvanost • nadzor

  22. Merjenje osebne čvrstosti • Lestvica osebne čvrstosti (Kobasa, 1979) • odtujenost od sebe • odtujenost od dela • varnost • nemoč • kognitivna struktura • eksternalnost • faktorske dimenzije • angažiranost • nadzor • izzvanost

  23. Osebna čvrstost in izvorne poteze • Izvorne poteze (16PF) • multipla korelacija s čvrstostjo (0,65) • najmočnejši prediktorji: -N, Q3, C, -Q2, -L

  24. Skok na Japonsko • Kosaka (1996): čvrstost in psihološko odzivanje na stres • lestvica osebne čvrstosti • PSRS (Niina in sod., 1990, meri odzive na stres)

  25. Odnos med čvrstostjo in psihološkim odzivanjem na stres

  26. Korelacije med čvrstostjo in psihološkim odzivanjem na stres

  27. Koherentnost in salutogeneza • Smisel za koherentnost in salutogeneza (Antonovsky, 1979, 1987) • še en poskus, združiti pomembne moderatorje kosanja s stresom • zaupanje v napovedljivost notranjega in zunanjega dogajanja • povezanost z občutji optimizma, zaupanja, zadovoljstva (sreče) • povezanost s smislom za humor

  28. Elastičnost, odpornost, kompetentnost • Elastičnost, neranljivost, odpornost (resiliency), kompetentnost • Teorija resilientnosti • Skupek osebnostnih lastnosti, ki vključuje • nadzor, samospoštovanje, nizko stopnjo anksioznosti in depresivnosti • Največ raziskav pri otrocih

  29. Merjenje resilientnosti • Merjenje elastičnosti • -Child Depression Inventory (Kovacs, 1981) • -Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale (Reynolds & Richmond, 1985) • -Self-Esteem Inventory (Coopersmith, 1981) • -Perceived Competence Scale for Children (Harter, 1982) Grades 3 to 9 • -Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (General Intelligence; Dunn & Dunn, 1981) • -Pupil Evaluation Inventory (Pekarik et al., 1976) • -Teacher’s Report Form (Achenbach, 1991) • -The Teacher-Child Rating Scale (Hightower et al., 1986) • -Child Behaviour Checklist (Achenbach, 1991) • -California Child Q-Set (Block & Block, 1969)

  30. Nevroticizem pozitivno korelira z izgorevanjem Prijetnost negativno korelira z izgorevanjem (Gaylord, 2001) Jedrno samovrednotenje (Core Self-Evaluation, CSE), Judge, Bono, 2001 negativno korelira z izgorevanjem (Tagler in sod., 2002) Osebnost in izgorevanje korelacije CSE z izgorevanjem med -0,30 in -0,35

  31. Osebnostni tipi, povezani s stresom • A in B tip • Tip C • Tip D • Drugi tipi nagnjenosti

  32. Že v 70 letih so raziskave Friedmana in Rosenmana opozorile na t.i. A in B tip osebnosti. Pri tipu A se pojavljajo koronarna obolenja (vključno s srčnim infarktom) in zvišan krvni pritisk do trikrat pogosteje kot pri tipu B. Novejše raziskave kažejo, da to velja tudi za ženske. Glavne osebnostne lastnosti tipa A so med drugim velika tekmovalnost in ambicioznost, sovražnost, agresivnost, občutje, da čas neusmiljeno priganja, nepotrpežljivost, glasno in hitro govorjenje, hitre in sunkovite kretnje idr. (za tip B je značilna nizka izraženost teh lastnosti). Sodeč po raziskavah je med vsemi lastnostmi tipa A najbolj kritična prisotnost sovražnih misli, naravnanosti in občutij – ta med vsem najbolj korelira z izbruhom koronarne bolezni. 3000 oseb spremljali 8 let (Friedman, Rosenman, 1974) Pozneje: jezna sovražnost kot “toksična emocija” Pozneje so odkrili še en tip osebnosti, ki naj bi kazal nagnjenost k raku (tip C, Eysenck, 1990, 1994). Zanj naj bi bilo značilno zanikanje in potlačevanje negativnih občutij in z zmanjšana zmožnost oziroma pripravljenost, da bi izražali negativna čustva, npr. jezo, agresivnost ipd. Tip C se raje žrtvuje “zaradi ljubega miru”, kot pa da bi se znal potegniti zase in pred drugimi pokazati svoja prava čustva. Več raziskav opozarja na vlogo sovražnosti pri osebah z rakom Tipi A, B in C

  33. Tipi A, B in C (nadaljevanje) • Tip A v resnici ni tako rizičen, kot so mislili • bolj je nevaren za tip B kot za svoje zdravje • rizičen pa je njegov podtip s toksično emocionalnostjo (napeta, jezna, sovražna in zavistna naravnanost) • toda: začarani krog - če preveč potlačujemo sovražnost, se poveča rizičnost za tip C tip C tip A in tip B

  34. Podatki Rosenmana in sod., 1975

  35. Podatki za C tip (Greer in sod. 1979)

  36. Tip D • Denollet (1996, 1998, 2000) • prospektivne študije (5 do 10 let) • 87 starejših oseb po prvem napadu • distresni tip osebnosti (D tip) • negativni afekt • zavrto izražanje samega sebe • povezanost s karediovaskularnimi obolenji • kardiovaskularni simptomi • miokardni infarkt • smrtnost • kakovost življenja

  37. Drugi tipi nagnjenosti k obolenjem • Tip I naj bi kazal nagnjenost k raku. V splošnem naj bi bila zanj značilnost nizka stimulacija, nezmožnost potrjevati se in uveljavljati, izogibanje konfliktom, pretirana potrpežljivost in defenzivnost, potlačevanje čustvenega izražanja, vdanost, odvisnost, nezmožnost dosegati cilje ob bolečem občutju oddaljenosti in izoliranosti od teh ciljev ali oseb itd. • Osebe tipa II naj bi bil nagnjene h kardiovaskularnim obolenjem. Zanje bi bila značilna močna stimulacija, na razočaranje reagirajo z jezo in sovraštvom, vendar se ne morejo distancirati od oseb ali stvari, ki so jih razočarale in ostajajo od njih odvisni, čeprav jih delajo nesrečne. Ne znajo “izpreči”, ampak ostanejo vezani na objekte, ki jih motijo in vzemirjajo. Do drugih so natrojeni tekmovalno in lahko tudi sovražno. • Tip III ne kaže nagnjenosti k specifičnim obolenjem. Je značilno ambivalenten v doživljanju in obnašanju. Njegove reakcije se menjavajo od vdajanja v usodo (kot pri tipu I) do agresivnosti in sovraštva (tip II), na pomembne osebe gledajo zdaj kot na vir sreče, zdaj kot na vir nesreče. Morda je zaradi stalnega spreminjanja iz stanja I v stanje II ta tip relativno varen pred rakom in KVO. • Tip IV je osebno avtonomen in spominja na že opisani tip B po Friedmanu in Rosenmanu. Ta tip sprejema tudi avtonomijo drugih in realistično gleda na življenje brez večjih kompulzij in napetosti. Tudi ta tip velja za relativno zdravega, kar zadeva najpogostejša obolenja, predvsem pa je “zdrav” in zrel v psihičnem pogledu. • Za tip V je značilno racionalno, razumsko delovanje, ki se ne meni za čustva. • Tip VI je egocentričen, lahko tudi antisocialno nastrojen; ne meni se dosti za moralne norme, dolžnosti in odgovornosti (čeprav zna to zahtevati od drugih). tip I (nagnjenost k raku) tip II (nagnjenost k KVO) tip III (ambitendentni tip) tip IV (avtonomni zdravi tip) tip V (racionalni nečustveni tip) tip VI (egocentrični, asocialni tip) tipi nagnjenosti (Grossarth-Maticek, Eysenck)

  38. Iskalci stresa • Potreba po stresu • Iskanje stresa (Klausner, 1968) • Tvegavost • Kontrolirano iskanje stresa (primer Hemingway) • Zuckerman • Iskanje stimulacije • Tveganje v sklopu temeljnih dimenzij osebnosti • Biološko: adrenalin in dopamin

  39. Težnja po optimalnem vzburjenju • Naravnanost k iskanju stresa • Premalo stresa in izzivov – občutek nekompetentnosti – upad samospoštovanja, depresivnost • Težnja po optimalnem vzburjenju (facilitacija dopamina) • Zuckerman: iskanje stimulacije (čutnih dražljajev) (glej nadaljevanje) • Preskušanje mej (“limit testers”) • Aktivno učenje z izkušnjami • Eksploracija, odkrivanje • Težnja k mojstrstvu, vrhunskem obvladovanju, virtuoznosti

  40. Iskanje stresa v sklopu dimenzij osebnosti • Temeljne dimenzije • Psihoticizem in ekstravertnost v PEN modelu • Ekstravertnost v B5 modelu • Iskanje stimulacije (Zuckerman) • Iskanje novosti in odvisnost od nagrade (Cloninger) • Povezava z dopaminom (NS) • In noradrenalinom (RD)

  41. Literatura • Adler, N. & Matthews, K. (1994). Health psychology: Why do some people get sick and some stay well? Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 229-259. • Aldwin, C. (1994). Stress, coping, and development. New York, Guilford. • Ballieux, R.E. Breakdown in human adaptation to 'stress' . 1984. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. • Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The Structure of Psychological Well-being. Chicago, Aldine. • Breslau, N. & Davis, G. C. (1987). Posttraumatic stress disorder. The stressor criterion. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175, 5, pp. 255-264. • Brosschot, J.F., Benschop, R.J., Godaert, G.L.R., Olff, M., De Smet, M., Heijnen, C.J., Ballieux, R.E. 1994. Influence of life stress on immunological reactivity to mild psychological stress. Psychosomatic Medicine. 56: 216-224. • Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J.K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267-283. • Elliott, G.R., Eisdorfer, C. 1982. Stress and Human Health. New York: Springer Publishing Company. • Folkman, S. & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of coping. American Psychologist, 55: 647-654. • Folkman, S. (1984). Personal control and stress and coping processes: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46: 839-852. • Folkman, S. (1992). Making the case for coping. Personal coping: Theory, research, and application. B. Carpenter. New York, Praeger: 31-46. • Folkman, S. (1997). Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress. Social Science and Medicine, 45: 1207-1221. • Friedman M, Rosenman R. H. (1959). Association of specific behavior pattern with blood and cardiovascular findings. JAMA 1959;169:1286-96. • Friedman, M., Rosenman, R. H. (1957). Comparison of fat intake of American men and women: possible relationship to incidence of clinical coronary artery disease. Circulation; 16:339-47. • Glaser, W.D., Anderson, K.N, Anderson, L.E. 1992. The Mosby Medical Encyclopedia. New York: Plume. • Grossarth-Maticek, R., Eysenck, H. J., Vetter, H., Schmidt, P. (1988). Psychosocial types and chronic diseases: Results of the Heidelberg prospective psychosomatic intervention study. In S. Maes, C. D. Spielberger, P. B. Defares., I. G. Sarason (eds.), Topics in Health Psychology. Wiley, New York • Holahan, C. J. & Moos, R. H. (1986). Personality, coping and family resources in stress resistance: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51: 389-395. • Holmes, T. H. & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The social readjustment rating scale. Journal of Psychometric Research, 11, 213-218. • Horowitz, M.J. (1986). Stress response syndromes (2nd Ed.) Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson. 

  42. Literatura • Kasl, S. V. (1990). Some considerations in the study of traumatic stress. Journal of Applied Social Psycho­logy, 1990, 20, 20, pp. 1655-1665. • Kiecolt-Glaser, J.K., Cacioppo, J.T., Malarkey, W.B., Glaser, R. 1992. Acute psychological stressors and short-term immune changes: What, why, for whom, and to what extent? Psychosomatic Medicine. 54: 680-685. • Klausner, S. (1968). Why man takes chances: Studies in stress-seeking. Garden City: Anchor Books. • Kobal Palčič, D. in Musek, J. (1996. Self-concept, personality styles and academic achievement : their inter-relationship. V: Piciga, D. (ur.). Cognition, learning & instruction, (The School Field, Vol. 7, no. 3/4). Ljubljana: The Slovene Society of Research in the School Field, 1996, str. 61-77. • Kobasa, S.C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into hardiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1-11.  • Kobasa, S.C. (1982). Commitment and coping in stress resistance among lawyers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 707-717.  • Kobasa, S.C., & Puccetti, M.C. (1983). Personality and social resources in stress resistance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 839-850. Kobasa, S.C., Maddi, S.R., & Courington, S. (1981). Personality and constitution as mediators in the stress-illness relationship. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 368-378. • Kobasa, S.C., Maddi, S.R., & Kahn, S. (1982). Hardiness and health: A prospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 168-177.  • Kobasa, S.C., Maddi, S.R., & Puccetti, M.C. (1982). Personality and exercise as buffers in the stress-illness relationship. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 5, 391-404. • Kobasa, S.C., Maddi, S.R., & Zola, M.A. (1983). Type A and hardiness. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 6, 41-51.  • Kobasa, S.C., Maddi, S.R., Puccetti, M.C., & Zola, M.A. (1985). Effectiveness of hardiness, exercise, and social support as resources against illness. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 29, 525-533.  • Lazarus, R. S. & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York, Springer. • Lazarus, R. S., Kanner, A. D. et al. (1980). Emotions: A cognitive-phenomenological analysis. Theories of Emotion. R. Plutchik & H. Kellerman. New York, Academic Press. • Manuck, S.B., Cohen, S., Rabin, B.S., Muldoon, M.F., Bachen, E.A. Individual differences in cellular immune response to stress. Psychological Science. 2: 111- 114. • Maslach, C. & Leiter, M. P. (2002). Resnica o izgorevanju na delovnem mestu. Ljubljana: Educy.

  43. Literatura • McEwen, B.S., Stellar, E. 1993. Stress and the Individual: Mechanism Leading to disease. • Moos, R. H. & Schaefer, J. A. (1993). Coping resources and processes: Current concepts and measures. Handbook of stress. L. Goldberger & S. Breznitz. Free Press, New York: 234-257. • Musek, J. (1985). Narava in determinante zavestnega odločanja. Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta, Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete. Str. 106-133. • Musek, J. (1988). Osebnost in kritično življensko dogajanje. Anthropos (Ljublj.), 1988, letn. 18, št. 1/3, str. 165-182, 1988, letn. 18, št. 4/6, str. 21-33. • Musek, J. (1992). Dimensions of personality and personal hardiness. Psihol. obz. (Ljubl.), september 1992, vol. 1, št. 1, str. 6-10. • Musek, J. (1992). Dimensions of personality and personal hardiness. Psihološka obzorja, 1992, 1. • Musek, J. (1992). Osebnost in šola. Nov. CRU, september 1992, 15, št. 4, str. 5-24. • Musek, J. (1993). Osebnost in vrednote. Ljubljana: Educy. Str. 225-266. • Musek, J. (1993/1997). Znanstvena podoba osebnosti. Ljubljana: Educy. Str. 346-356. • Musek, J. (1994). Posttravmatska stresna motnja. V: M. Polič (ur.) Psihološki vidiki nesreč. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za obrambo Republike Slovenije, str. 39-44. • Musek, J. (2000). Nova psihološka teorija vrednot. Ljubljana: Inštitut za psihologijo osebnosti & Educy. Str. 201-248. • Nastran Ule, M. (1993). Psihologija vsakdanjega življenja. Ljubljana: Znanstveno in publicistično središče. Str. 119-156. • Parkes, K. R. (1986). Coping in stressful episodes: The role of individual differences, environmental factors, and situational characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51: 1277-1292. • Rosenman, R. H, Friedman, M, Straus R, et al. (1964). A predictive study of coronary heart disease: the Western Collaborative Group Study. JAMA, 15-22. • Selye, H. (1974). The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill. • Trimble, M. R. (1985). Post-traumatic stress disorder: History of a concept. In C.R. Figley (Ed.), Trauma and its wake (pp. 5-14). New York: Brunner/Mazel. • Ver Ellen, P. & van Kammen, D.P. (1990). The biological findings in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: A review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 21, pp. 1789-1821. • Weiss, D.S. (1993). Psychological processes in traumatic stress. In: Allen, R. (Ed.). Handbook of post-disaster interventions. (Special Issue). Journal ov Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 8, No. 5, 3-28. • Zeidner, M. & Endler, N. S. (1996). Handbook of Coping: Theory, Research, Applications. New York, John Wiley & Sons.

  44. Nekaj spletnih strani • http://amby.com/worksite/juggling.html • http://amby.com/worksite/wp_psych.html • http://chat.carleton.ca/~ccunnin2/99essay.html (esej) • http://imt.net/~randolfi/StressLinks.html • http://wellness.uwsp.edu/Health_Service/services/stress.shtml • http://www.datacomm.ch/kmatter/psychone.htm • http://www.stress.org.uk/ • http://www.stress.org/ • http://www.unl.edu/stress/mgmt/ • http://helping.apa.org/daily/naps.html. • http://www.aacap.org/facts/htm • http://www.inspiredinside.com/ • http//www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed414659.html • http://www.nmha.org/infoctr/factsheets/41.cfm • http://www.unc.edu/depts.ucc/Mstress.html

More Related