Resource Conservation Theory
The theory of resources conservation ( "Conservation of Resources Theory" (COR theory)) offers a theoretical model, which is to explain stress concentrates on resources.
People need the necessary resources to maintain their mental and physical well-being . The stress theory the gap between environmental theories and would like cognitive approaches stress research bridged by objective and perceived factors to explain both stress and stress management are used. The theory sees resource changes as the key to stress and assumes that resource losses are more important than resource gains, but that gains can absorb future losses.
In this theory, human action is viewed in connection with the social environment, since people not only protect their own integrity, but also that of the community. The social environment is made up of, among other things, nationality, gender, class and culture. People act according to different rules and receive and protect other resources depending on the prevailing social context, so that not only individual resources and individual resource management, but also considerations about shared resources, resource transfer and joint coping with stress are relevant to the experience of stress.
Basic assumptions
The resource-oriented model assumes that people tend to protect their own resources and strive to build new ones. Both critical life events and everyday, small stressors that prevent the individual from protecting or cultivating resources influence the acquisition and maintenance of resources . Stress is defined as a reaction to the environment in which (1) the loss of resources threatens, (2) the actual loss of resources occurs or (3) the adequate gain of resources after a resource investment fails. In particular, the loss or imminent loss of resources is stressful, since people then have to cope with future challenges with reduced coping capacities . But a lack of resource gains after an investment also causes stress, since individuals could not increase their coping capacities despite the use of resources. Since you have invested resources without making a profit, the lack of profit corresponds to a loss of resources. Resources are the only necessary element to understand stress.
Classification of resources
Resources are objects, personal characteristics, conditions and energies that are valued by the individual. Object resources are e.g. B. clothes, a car or a house. Personal resources are self-efficacy, empathy and social responsibility. Autonomy, participation in decision-making, marital status, and job security are examples of conditional resources. Knowledge, time and money are typical energy resources that help to acquire additional resources.
Resource gains and losses
Losses or gains of resources associated with a particular event are essential for the stress process, but not the event itself, which is only the starting point of such a process. For example, an oral exam is a critical life event that can be associated with gains on the one hand and losses on the other. By taking the exam, a candidate accepts losses of social contacts and limited free time, but gains knowledge and status. The cost-benefit balance resulting from the evaluation of the resources has a decisive influence on further action (Hobfoll & Buchwald, 2004; Buchwald, 2002). A resource evaluation list (Conservation of Resources Evaluation, COR-E for short; Hobfoll, Lilly & Jackson, 1992; Hobfoll, 1998) was developed to record resource losses and gains. The theory of resource conservation emphasizes that positive and negative changes in resources have different effects. The first principle of the theory postulates that if the amount of resource loss and gain is the same, the loss will have the greater impact. The theory thus distances itself from the principle of homeostasis . The second principle is based on the assumption that people want to invest resources in order to protect themselves from losses, to recover from losses and to gain new resources. This motivation prompts individuals to invest existing resources in new profits in order to expand the entire resource pool. This not only prevents future losses, but at the same time reinforces the respective goals of the individual (e.g. status). For example, a student invests B. regularly in his studies and expects in the long term an expansion of his knowledge, an improvement in his performance, a good exam grade and finally an attractive job. These two principles lead to further conclusions: Individuals with many resources are less vulnerable to losses and are more likely to use existing resources profitably. Conversely, individuals with few resources are more vulnerable to loss of resources and, furthermore, less predestined to gain new resources. Due to their resource deficits, they are hardly able to establish profit spirals. Instead, initial losses give rise to further disadvantages in coping with stress. A cycle emerges in which the system becomes more fragile and vulnerable with each loss and in the course of this spiral of loss prevents the individual from coping with upcoming stressful problems.
Individual and collective coping with stress
The multiaxial coping model associated with the theory of resource conservation conceptualizes the management of stress in the context of objective situation characteristics and interpersonal relationship patterns. Since most of the stresses are not only an individual but also a common problem, coping efforts are required from all dyad or group members involved . The dependence on other people in coping with stress requires a consideration of a social dimension of coping. For example, the need for social ties, the deferral of personal needs in favor of the group or the consideration of social hierarchies play a role. In addition, the coping success is often linked to the judgment and cooperation of others. The multiaxial coping model wants to do justice to these aspects, but emphasizes less emotional and more behavioral coping strategies. Traditional approaches assume that problem-centered coping is often most effective. The multiaxial model integrates prosocial strategies as an essential part of successful stress management. A coping instrument was developed, the Strategic Approach to Coping Scale, which records both individual and collective coping strategies.
The multiaxial coping model
The multiaxial model offers a general heuristic for understanding individual and common copings. It originally consisted of two axes (Hobfoll et al., 1994), which mapped active versus passive and prosocial versus antisocial coping. Individual coping efforts have potential social consequences and the act of coping as such often takes place in interaction with others. Both coping axes are not independent of each other, as social actions also imply activity. By adding a third axis of direct-indirect coping, socio-cultural influences and hierarchical differences are taken into account that reveal coping behavior in different cultures and social positions.
Active-passive axis
It indicates the extent of individual coping activities, depending on how active or passive people are in overcoming their problems or building up resources. The active-passive coping dimension must be separated from problem-focused coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Endler & Parker, 1990). Activities in the form of proactive copings (cf. Aspinwall & Taylor, 1997) are explicitly included here, which do not solve the problem itself, but imply preparatory measures. In this way, a resource pool can be created preventively in advance of the actual stressful situation, which should facilitate the current management of the exam. At the other end of the axis is passivity, which can be shown in avoidance and cautious action. To act cautiously means to always inform yourself precisely about the individual connections and possible consequences within the entire coping process before deciding on an action. Nevertheless, avoidance behavior is even more passive, since in this case the action is not carried out in the first place.
Pro-social-anti-social axis
This axis denotes the social dimension. Coping activities differ in the extent to which people interact with others. The center of this axis indicates a position of isolated actions. At the end points of this axis there is pro- and anti-social coping. Prosocial coping involves adaptive acts in which one looks to others, seeks their help, or behaves in a way that involves positive social interactions. Prosocial coping includes seeking social support and trying to form coalitions or teams with others (social joining). People can be very active, but a lower level of activity is also possible, which is referred to as cautious action (see above). In contrast to aggressive (aggressive action) and self-assertive behavior (assertiveness), cautious behavior in interaction with others is often rated negatively in western cultures. Here, however, this strategy is meant in a positive light and describes the tendency to empathize with others, to respect their needs and to give them the opportunity to express themselves instead of ignoring them. Antisocial action describes coping activities with the intention of hurting others or ignoring injuries that have occurred. Antisocial behavior can be used to gain advantage over others. By exploiting or attacking other people's weaknesses, you want to get into a better position yourself. Rigid social classes and the performance and competitive orientation of our society often justify these antisocial actions as adequate coping patterns. In cultures that value aggressive self-confidence (e.g. America, Australia), antisocial coping in the form of dominance and aggressiveness can be a promising adaptation strategy. According to Western European standards, a more humble, less dominant-aggressive attitude is often perceived as socially acceptable. Nevertheless, active, aggressive attitudes can also be socially rewarded there. Aggressive-antisocial coping attitudes must be differentiated from those that, as instinctive spontaneous reactions, can be aggressive, but do not cross certain socially determined limits. So there is another form of anti-social coping that is accidentally anti-social because it is done instinctively. Instinctive action can cause pain to others without consciously intending to do so.
Direct-indirect axis
Indirectness is an important part of community that Western psychology has only recently begun to appreciate (cf. Kashima et al., 1995; Triandis, 1994). Indirectness rather requires active, social coping strategies in the sense of a strategic, diplomatic approach. Acting in this way in coping with stress is geared towards manipulating special situations in such a way that a desired behavior is forced. It requires skillful action, in which an interaction partner is not asked to do something directly, but is given to understand in an indirect way how to behave. For those who act indirectly, this means, for example, showing themselves one way but acting the other way. Instead of being direct and sincere, one is difficult to see through. The interaction partner does not immediately recognize the intent of the indirect agent, so is not intentionally induced to do something. This saves him from losing face, because he can correct a possible wrongdoing or an inadequacy independently without having been advised. This contributes to harmony within dyads or groups, because it allows everyone involved to remain fundamentally true to their own goals (Hobfoll, 1998; Buchwald, 2007).
literature
- Buchwald, Petra: Dyadic coping in oral exams . Hogrefe, Göttingen 2002. ISBN 3-8017-1654-6
- Buchwald, Petra: Power in exams - a resource-oriented analysis. In: Michael Göhlich, Eckard König & Christine Schwarzer (eds.): Advice, power and organizational learning . VS-Verlag, Wiesbaden 2007.
- Hobfoll, Stevan & Buchwald, Petra: The theory of resource conservation and the multiaxial coping model - an innovative stress theory. In: Petra Buchwald, Christine Schwarzer & Stevan E. Hobfoll (eds.): Coping with stress together - resource management and multi-axial coping . Hogrefe, Göttingen 2004, pp. 11–26. ISBN 3-8017-1679-1
- Hobfoll, Stevan E .: The ecology of stress. Hemisphere , Washington, DC 1988. ISBN 0-89116-637-8
- Hobfoll, Stevan E .: Stress, culture, and community. Plenum Press, New York 1998. ISBN 0-306-45942-6
- Knecht, Alban & Schubert, Franz-Christian: Resources in the welfare state and in social work. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2012. ISBN 3-17-021810-7
- Schwarzer, Christine, Starke, Dagmar & Buchwald, Petra: The diagnosis of coping with the multiaxial stress management inventory (SBI). In: Petra Buchwald, Christine Schwarzer & Stevan E. Hobfoll (eds.): Coping with stress together - resource management and multiaxial coping . Hogrefe, Göttingen 2004, pp. 60–73.
- Hobfoll, Stevan E .; Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist , 1989; Vol. 44, pp. 513-524
Individual evidence
- ↑ Hobfoll, SE, Lilly, RS, Jackson, AP: Conservation of social resources and the self. In: HOF Veiel & U. Baumann (eds.): The series in clinical and community psychology. The meaning and measurement of social support . Hemisphere Publishing Corp., 1992, pp. 125-141 .
- ↑ abbreviated SACS; see. Hobfoll, 1998, Schwarzer, Starke & Buchwald, 2004