Distractive emotion regulation, which relieves arousal through attention shift, protects individuals from strong stress. Distractive emotion regulation is widely used in everyday life and although it has great implications in the context of adaptation such as to addiction, it is generally not considered separately from avoidant regulation, it has neither been clearly defined nor measured.
Through a literature review and qualitative analysis, we selected adults’ distractive emotion regulation behaviors. We explored the construct by developing measurement on the distractive behaviors that adults use to regulate emotion.
Factor analysis revealed that distractive emotion regulation consisted of four factors: “consumption distraction” concerned with activities such as shopping, internet use, and TV viewing; “arousal control distraction” related to activities such as exercise, bathing, and deep breathing; “reserving distraction” pertaining to activities such as eating, sleeping, and listening to music; and “aggressive distraction” involving behaviors such as bullying, physical destructiveness, or cursing. Each factor had a different correlation with stress coping dimensions and subjective well-being.
Distractive emotion regulation is a multidimensional concept composed of sub-factors with different functions and clinical implications in daily life.
The purpose of the study was to identify the effect of calling, meaning of work, job stress, and stress coping on organizational commitment among career soldiers. Data were collected from 160 career soldiers using a structured self-reported questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and stepwise multiple regression. The results showed the mean scores were organizational commitment 3.72±0.80, calling 3.00±0.66, meaning of work 3.05±0.36, job stress 2.28±0.35, active stress coping 3.67±0.36, and passive stress coping 3.16±0.41 each. Organizational commitment had positive correlation with calling (r=.19, p=.019), meaning of work(r=.45, p<.001), and active stress coping (r=.44, p<.001); but negative correlation with job stress (r=−.53, p<.001). The affecting factors were job stress (β=−.36), active stress coping (β=.18), meaning of work (β=.17), monthly income (β=−.16) in order. The explained variances for organizational commitment was 37.0% among career soldiers. Therefore, in order to improve the organizational commitment of career soldiers, it is necessary to promote active coping skills to reduce job stress and to develop educational strategies to give meaning of work as a career soldier from the period of junior leaders.
Citations
The purpose of this descriptive study was to investigate the effects of personality and coping behavior on clinical practice stress in nursing students which was experienced at clinical practice. The data were collected using questionnaire from the convenience sample of 88 nursing students. The data were collected from May 21 to 31, 2016. Data were analyzed with independent t-test, one way ANOVA, Pearson correlation coefficients, and multiple regression by using SPSS version 23.0. The mean score for clinical practice stress was 1.43±0.62, and the score for student domain (1.73±0.96) was the highest in clinical practice stress. Among the big five personality traits, neuroticism had positive correlation (r=.356, p=.001) with the clinical practice stress. Coping behavior (r=.285, p=.007) and passive coping behavior (r=.327, p=.002) also had positive correlation with the clinical practice stress in nursing students. The significant major predictors of clinical practice stress were neuroticism (β=.31) and passive coping behavior (β=.27). The explained variances for clinical practice stress was 18% in nursing students. Therefore, development of a program on enhancing personality and coping behavior to reduce clinical practice stress is needed.
Citations