Coping styles, body perception and stress

Abstract

Individuals with a repressive coping style are often defined as those who report low levels of self-reported anxiety and high levels of defensiveness. They may deny feeling stressed but show signs of an elevated physiological stress response and evidence has shown a link between repressive coping and poor physical health outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this thesis was to enhance our understanding of the nature of a repressive coping style. The thesis is presented as three separate papers. Paper One presents a systematic narrative review of studies on the relationship between repressive coping and attentional bias, which is seen as a key component within this coping style. We describe the different attentional bias paradigms and present evidence suggesting that individuals with a repressive coping style are quicker to avoid emotional stimuli and resist threat processing. A similar pattern is seen in other conditions e.g., social anxiety, and therefore comparisons between the two can be considered (i.e., overt vs. covert anxiety). We consider the clinical implications of these findings, including how best to identify and support individuals with a repressive coping style. Another possible mechanism linking Repressive Coping Style with poor health outcomes is interoception. Paper Two presents a study designed to investigate this hypothesis. A correlation design measuring repressive coping tendency, interoceptive accuracy, interoceptive awareness and stress perception with 40 student participants was conducted. There were modest, non-significant correlations in the expected direction between repressive coping, interoception and stress perception, that may have been significant with a larger sample size. Therefore, further research is warranted and methodological considerations for future studies are considered Paper Three is a critical appraisal of the processes involved in conducting the research in both papers 1 and 2. This paper reflects on the design, methodology and interpretation of findings from the research considering the strengths, limitations, and suggestions for future research. Finally, the paper concludes with personal reflections of the research process.

Date of Award	31 Dec 2021
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	The University of Manchester
Supervisor	Kimberly Dienes (Supervisor) & Richard Brown (Supervisor)