_edi.png)
Introduction
In our fast-paced and demanding world, stress has become an inevitable part of life. To comprehend the complex nature of stress and how it affects individuals, researchers have developed transactional models. Two prominent transactional models of stress, proposed by Cox & Griffiths and Lazarus & Folkman, provide valuable insights into the stress experience. In this blog post, we will explore these models, their key concepts, practical applications, and their limitations.
Transactional Model by Cox & Griffiths
The transactional model of stress proposed by Cox & Griffiths emphasises the dynamic and interactive nature of the stress process. According to this model, stress arises from the ongoing interaction between an individual and their environment. Key components of this model include:
1. Stress Appraisal: Individuals continuously appraise and evaluate their environment to assess potential stressors. Appraisal involves evaluating the significance, controllability, and predictability of stressors.
2. Coping Strategies: When individuals perceive a stressor, they engage in coping efforts to manage the situation. Coping strategies can be problem-focused (addressing the stressor directly) or emotion-focused (managing emotional responses to stress).
3. Feedback Loops: The transactional model acknowledges that the stress process is not linear but involves feedback loops. Coping efforts can influence how stressors are appraised and vice versa.
Applications of Cox & Griffiths' Model
Stress Management: The model informs stress management interventions by helping individuals recognise their stress appraisals and choose effective coping strategies.
Work Environment: Organisations can use the model to assess and modify work environments to reduce stressors and enhance employees' ability to cope.
Personal Growth: Understanding stress appraisal can lead to personal growth by identifying opportunities for resilience and adaptation.
Limitations of Cox & Griffiths' Model
Complex Appraisal: The model's emphasis on individual appraisal can make it challenging to quantify and predict stress responses consistently.
Lack of External Factors: It focuses primarily on individual perceptions and may not consider external factors that contribute to stress.
Transactional Model by Lazarus & Folkman
Lazarus and Folkman's transactional model of stress builds upon the idea that stress is a result of an individual's appraisal of the situation. Key components include:
1. Primary Appraisal: Individuals evaluate whether a situation is relevant to their well-being. This appraisal can result in three outcomes: benign (no stress), positive (eustress), or negative (distress).
2. Secondary Appraisal: If a situation is appraised as relevant and potentially harmful, individuals assess their resources and coping abilities. This appraisal guides the selection of coping strategies.
3. Coping Efforts: Coping strategies are chosen based on the secondary appraisal. Lazarus and Folkman identified two main types of coping: problem-focused (addressing the stressor) and emotion-focused (managing emotional responses).
Applications of Lazarus & Folkman's Model
Clinical Psychology: The model is widely used in clinical settings to understand how individuals cope with stressors and develop tailored interventions.
Health Psychology: It informs research and interventions related to stress-related health issues, such as chronic illness management.
Workplace Stress Management: Employers can use the model to identify and address sources of stress in the workplace, as well as support employees' coping efforts.
Limitations of Lazarus & Folkman's Model
Subjectivity: Like other transactional models, it relies on individuals' subjective appraisals, which can vary widely.
Individual-Centric: The model focuses primarily on the individual's appraisal and coping processes, potentially overlooking broader societal or environmental factors that contribute to stress.
Conclusion
Transactional models of stress, such as those proposed by Cox & Griffiths and Lazarus & Folkman, offer valuable frameworks for understanding the multifaceted nature of stress. By recognising the importance of individual appraisals and coping efforts, individuals and organisations can better navigate the challenges of modern life. However, it's crucial to acknowledge the limitations of these models and consider the broader context in which stress occurs to develop comprehensive strategies for stress management and well-being.
References that support the concepts and information presented in the blog post on the Transactional Models by Cox & Griffiths and Lazarus & Folkman:
Cox & Griffiths' Model:
1. Cox, T., & Griffiths, A. (1995). The nature and measurement of work-related stress: Theory and practice. In M. J. Schabracq, J. A. M. Winnubst, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of Work and Health Psychology (pp. 13-56). John Wiley & Sons.
2. Cox, T., & Mackay, C. J. (1983). A transactional approach to occupational stress. In C. L. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds.), Stress at work (pp. 56-80). John Wiley & Sons.
Lazarus & Folkman's Model:
1. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
2. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1987). Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping. European Journal of Personality, 1(3), 141-169.
3. Lazarus, R. S. (1993). From psychological stress to the emotions: A history of changing outlooks. Annual Review of Psychology, 44(1), 1-21.
Applications and Limitations:
4. Park, C. L., & Folkman, S. (1997). Meaning in the context of stress and coping. Review of General Psychology, 1(2), 115-144.
5. Skinner, E. A., Edge, K., Altman, J., & Sherwood, H. (2003). Searching for the structure of coping: A review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychological Bulletin, 129(2), 216-269.
6. Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. Springer.
7. de Wolff, M. S., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1997). Sensitivity and attachment: A meta-analysis on parental antecedents of infant attachment. Child Development, 68(4), 571-591.