Managing & Coping with Stress (AQA A-Level Psychology): Revision Notes

Gender Differences in Coping with Stress

Introduction

Research has consistently observed that women typically live longer than men across most cultures. Psychologists have investigated whether this longevity difference might relate to how men and women handle stress differently. Three main explanations have been proposed: evolutionary differences in physiological stress responses, variation in lifestyle behaviours related to stress, or the possibility that women employ more effective stress management strategies.

Traditional coping method distinctions

Problem-focused vs emotion-focused approaches

Researchers Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman (1984) identified two primary categories of coping strategies. Problem-focused coping involves tackling stress by addressing its underlying causes through direct, practical and rational methods. This typically includes taking control measures to eliminate or escape from the stressor, alongside learning new skills such as time management or relaxation techniques.

Emotion-focused coping operates differently by targeting the anxiety and negative emotions associated with a stressor rather than the stressor itself. Common approaches include various forms of avoidance, distraction techniques, staying busy, and employing cognitive appraisal to view the stressor more positively.

Research findings on gender patterns

Traditional research suggested men typically favour problem-focused approaches while women more commonly employ emotion-focused strategies. However, Brennan Peterson and colleagues (2006) examined coping strategies among men and women diagnosed with infertility, using multiple measures including the Ways of Coping questionnaire (Folkman et al. 1986).

Tend and befriend theory

Alternative to fight or flight

Shelley Taylor and her research team (2000) highlighted that most stress response research had been conducted with male participants, potentially missing important aspects of how women respond to stressors. From an evolutionary perspective, the traditional fight or flight response may be less advantageous for females, as confronting or fleeing from predators would compromise their ability to protect offspring.

Taylor et al. proposed that women have evolved a distinct stress response pattern called tend and befriend. Tending involves protective, calming and nurturing behaviours towards offspring, combined with blending into the environment rather than confronting threats. Befriending encompasses seeking support from social networks during stressful periods to enhance coping abilities.

Research support

This befriending behaviour appears selective, tending to be directed primarily towards other women rather than men. Lewis and Linder (2000) discovered that most female participants, when confronted with stressful experiences, preferred seeking support from other women rather than men. This pattern may have evolved as a protective mechanism for females and their offspring against threatening males, including close family members.

Biological mechanisms: oxytocin

The tend and befriend stress response is biochemically driven by oxytocin, a hormone produced by both males and females. Oxytocin promotes feelings of goodwill and affiliation with others, playing a crucial role in mother-infant attachment bond formation. Additionally, it helps the body recover more rapidly from the physiological effects of stressors.

Ruth Feldman et al. (2007) measured oxytocin levels in women during pregnancy and shortly after birth, finding that women with the highest oxytocin levels formed stronger bonds with their newborn babies, further supporting the tend and befriend theory.

Evidence challenging gender differences

Role constraint theory

Pilar Matud (2004) found that while women and men experienced similar numbers of stressful life changes, they differed in type. Women reported more family-related stressors while men encountered more work-related ones. Women also perceived their stressors as more negative and less controllable, leading to more emotion-focused coping approaches. This suggests gender differences may reflect different stressor exposure rather than fundamental differences in being male or female.

Porter and Stone study

Laura Porter and Arthur Stone (1995) measured coping behaviour daily throughout their study period. While women reported more relationship-related stressors and men more work-related ones (consistent with other research), when this variation in stressor types was controlled for statistically, no gender differences in coping methods emerged. The choice of coping style appeared to depend on the nature of the stressful situation rather than gender.

Research methodology issues

The distinction between emotion-focused and problem-focused approaches may be overly simplistic. Peterson et al. (2006) discovered that men and women used coping methods that didn't fit neatly into the traditional categories. For example, seeking social support could serve either information-gathering purposes (problem-focused) or emotional support needs (emotion-focused).

Additionally, research validity is affected by methodological choices. Denise De Ridder (2000) found that women reported using emotion-focused coping more than men, but only when participants recalled past experiences retrospectively. This difference disappeared when ecological momentary assessment (EMA) was used - a method requiring participants to report coping strategies at regular intervals during the day rather than relying on memory. This suggests people may remember successful coping methods more clearly than unsuccessful ones, potentially creating artificial gender differences in retrospective studies.

Key studies