Advancing complex explanatory conceptualizations of daily negative and positive affect: Trigger and maintenance coping action patterns.

Abstract

The present study addressed a fundamental gap between research and clinical work by advancing complex explanatory conceptualizations of coping action patterns that trigger and maintain daily negative affect and (low) positive affect. One hundred ninety-six community adults completed measures of perfectionism, and then 6 months later completed questionnaires at the end of the day for 14 consecutive days to provide simultaneous assessments of appraisals, coping, and affect across different stressful situations in everyday life. Multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) supported complex explanatory conceptualizations that demonstrated (a) disengagement trigger patterns consisting of several distinct appraisals (e.g., event stress) and coping strategies (e.g., avoidant coping) that commonly operate together across many different stressors when the typical individual experiences daily increases in negative affect and drops in positive affect; and (b) disengagement maintenance patterns composed of different appraisal and coping maintenance factors that, in combination, can explain why individuals with higher levels of self-critical perfectionism have persistent daily negative affect and low positive mood 6 months later. In parallel, engagement patterns (triggers and maintenance) composed of distinct appraisals (e.g., perceived social support) and coping strategies (e.g., problem-focused coping) were linked to compensatory experiences of daily positive affect. These findings demonstrate the promise of using daily diary methodologies and MSEM to promote a shared understanding between therapists and clients of trigger and maintenance coping action patterns that explain what precipitates and perpetuates clients' difficulties, which, in turn, can help achieve the 2 overarching therapy goals of reducing clients' distress and bolstering resilience.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 71 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.