Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 28, No.

3, 1999

Resilience in Adolescents: Protective Role of Social

Support, Coping Strategies, Self-Esteem, and Social
Activities on Experience of Stress and Depression
Michelle Dumont1 and Marc A. Provost2
Received September 14, 1997; accepted December 9, 1998

In this study, 297 adolescents (141 eighth graders and 156 eleventh graders)
were classified into 3 groups created from crossing scores of depressive symp-
toms and frequency of daily hassles: well adjusted, resilient, and vulnerable. A
discriminant function analysis was performed to investigate group differences on
self-esteem, social support, different strategies of coping, and different aspects of
social life. The analysis revealed that self-esteem, problem-solving coping strate-
gies, and antisocial and illegal activities with peers helped to discriminate groups:
Well-adjusted adolescents had higher self-esteem than adolescents in the 2 other
groups; in addition, resilient adolescents had higher self-esteem than vulnera-
ble adolescents. For the second significant discriminating variables, antisocial
and illegal activities with peers, both resilient and vulnerable adolescents had
higher scores than well-adjusted adolescents. Finally, resilient adolescents had
higher scores on problem-solving coping strategies than adolescents in the 2 other
groups.

This research was supported by a grant awarded to the first author (FIR, Universite du Quebec a
Trois-Rivieres). We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Melanie Labbe in the data collection
and Maurice Gaudreault in the data analysis.
1
Professor, Departement de Psychologie, Universite du Quebec a Trois-Rivieres. Received Ph.D. from
Universite du Quebec a Montreal, and did a postdoctoral fellowship at the Universite de Neuchatel,
Switzerland. Research interests include psychosocial development, stress, and protective factors
through childhood to young adulthood. To whom correspondence should be addressed at Departement
de psychologie. Universite du Quebec a Trois-Rivieres, C.P.500 Trois-Rivieres, Qu6bec G9A 5H7,
Canada.
2
Professor, Departement de Psychologie, Universite du Quebec a Trois-Rivieres. Received Ph.D. from
Universite de Montreal and did a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Keele, Great Britain.
Research interests include family and environmental factors of psychosocial development.

343

0047-2891/99/0600-0343$16.00/0© 1999 Plenum Publishing Corporatio:

344 Dumont and Provost

INTRODUCTION

Adolescence is best described as a transitional period in which individuals

experience major physical, cognitive, and socioaffective changes. Other life events
(e.g., family structure changes, school changes, and accidents) also can affect
adolescents' well-being. Some children adapt successfully and in some ways are
stimulated by these life events whereas others experience adjustment problems.
The study of these individual differences may provide information on potential
protective factors that may help adolescents even in at-risk contexts. Central to this
approach is the concept of resilience, which stems from observations that some
high-risk individuals unexpectedly show no clear signs of psychological distress
(Garmezy, 1983; Rutter, 1979). Although there is a reasonable amount of research
on resilience in childhood, few have studied the individual differences in the stress-
distress relation during the transition from childhood to adulthood. Herman-Stahl
and Petersen (1996) have proposed the creation of 4 distinct groups of adolescents
by crossing indices of depressive symptoms and frequency of negative life events:
(1) well adjusted (low on both indices), (2) resilient (high on level of stress and
low on depression), (3) vulnerable (high on both indices), and (4) nonadjusted
(low on level of stress and high on depression). Herman-Stahl and Petersen (1996)
found that adolescents from the well-adjusted group had higher optimism, more
active coping, and more positive relations with parents and peers than adolescents
in the 3 other groups. They also found that resilient adolescents scored higher
than vulnerable adolescents on the preceding variables. This result is important
in that it suggests that resilient adolescents may develop normally even if they
have experienced difficult family environments. The goal of the present study is
to examine the beneficial role of certain internal factors (self-esteem, coping) and
external factors (social support and social activities) in protecting youth from a
normative sample, who are experiencing depression and repetitive stress known
as daily hassles.

Stress-Distress Relation

The literature suggests that life events are a major source of positive and neg-
ative stress for adolescents, especially those who are depressive or anxious (L. H.
Cohen etal., 1987;Goodyer, 1994; Plancherel etal., 1992; Swearingen and Cohen,
1985), who experience problems in social or academic spheres (Compas, 1987;
Compas, et al., 1989; Dubois et al., 1992; Rowlison and Felner, 1988; Wagner and
Compas, 1990), and who have poor self-esteem (Hoffman et al., 1988). However,
correlations reported between life events and mental health problems are consis-
tent but generally modest (from .20 to .30; see Thoits, 1983). In the past 20 years,
research has looked for other factors, such as the negative impact of small daily
hassles on mental health. Kanner etal. (1981) have defined daily hassles as frustra-
tions and irritants stemming from transactions with the environment (homework,
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 345

quarrels with friends, etc.). As with life events, the negative effects of these repeated
microevents on health are well documented in preadolescents and adolescents, es-
pecially in adaptation competence (Rowlison and Felner, 1988) and anxiety or
depressive problems (Compas et al., 1989; Kanner et al., 1987).
The interest for daily hassles is growing rapidly for 3 main reasons. First,
questionnaires that assess daily hassles make a marked distinction between the ob-
jective experience (i.e., the frequency of each hassle) and the subjective experience
(i.e., the perceived intensity of each hassle), whereas questionnaires on life events,
especially those in line with the seminal work of Holmes and Rahe (1967), focus
mostly on the objective experience. Second, life events are relatively rare, whereas
daily hassles are common and show a greater interindividual variance (Aldwin,
1994). Finally, the literature also suggests that daily hassles account for a greater
percentage of the variance attributed to mental health problems, even when they
are entered in the same regression equations as life events. This implies that daily
hassles might be better predictors of the psychological health of young adolescents
than are life events (Gersten et al., 1977; Plancherel et al., 1997).
Using a path analytic model, Plancherel et al. (1997) have shown that daily
hassles may be considered as a mediator of the effect of life events on mental health.
This finding suggests that daily hassles may not only trigger stress, but they also
may be influenced by internal individual factors (i.e., low self-esteem might induce
one to see only negative aspects of situations or to have a poor perception of one's
abilities to cope with stressing environments).

Protective Factors

Recent research has emphasised certain personal and environmental resources

that buffer the effects of normative and nonnormative stress on health (F. Cohen,
1987; S. Cohen and Wills, 1985; Dohrenwend and Dohrenwend, 1981; Garmezy,
1983; Plancherel et al., 1994; Wheaton, 1985). These resources, whether internal
like self-esteem or external like social support, and coping strategies (actions used
to deal with problems or resources available within the individual; Plancherel
et al., 1994), are considered to be protective factors. Research has shown that the
deleterious effects of stress on mental health are less important for individuals who
possess such resources compared to those who do not (Plancherel et al., 1994). In
this study, we examine variables that have been considered as protective factors in
the stress-distress relation.

Social Support

Social support is a multidimensional concept that includes the support ac-

tually received (informative, emotional, and instrumental) and the sources of the
support (friends, family, strangers, and animals). It can be considered as structural
346 Dumont and Provost

(quantitative) or functional (qualitative) (Heitzmann and Kaplan, 1988; Provost,

1995). Cohen and Wills (1985) and Plancherel etal. (1994) have identified 2 major
models to explain the protective roles of social support on stress. The first, known
as the principal effect model, posits that social support gives an individual a gen-
eral positive context without regard for the actual experiences of stressful events
(Bettschart et al., 1992). The second model is known as the stress-buffering effect
and has been studied largely with social support and, more recently, with cop-
ing strategies (Aro et al., 1989; Nunez et al., 1992; Plancherel et al., 1994; Roos
and Cohen, 1987; Smith etal., 1990; Wertlieb etal., 1987; Wheaton, 1985). This
model supposes that adequate social support will offset or moderate the impact of
stress on health. For example, Barrera (1986) suggests that, in adults, the relation
between stress and distress is higher within a context of low social support. Bene-
ficial effects of social support also have been observed in youth (F. Cohen, 1987;
S. Cohen and Wills, 1985; Daniels and Moos, 1990; Dubow and Tisak, 1989;
Johnson, 1986). When preadolescents reported low satisfaction with their social
support, the probability of having problems of anxiety, depression, or sleep dis-
turbances is high (Bolognini et al., 1992). In adolescents and young adults, low
satisfaction with social support is associated with depressive or psychosomatic
symptoms, anxiety, and interpersonal sensitivity (Burke and Weir, 1978; Compas
etal., 1986).

Coping Strategies

Coping strategies are discussed by Lazarus and Folkman (Lazarus, 1966;

Lazarus and Folkman, 1984) who refer to coping as the cognitive and behavioral
efforts that allow an individual to tolerate, escape, or minimize the effects of
stress. Strategies of coping have been studied mostly in adults. However, in the
past decade, interest for children and adolescents has grown rapidly (Altschuler
and Ruble, 1989; Blanchard-Fields and Coleman-Irion, 1988; Copeland and Hess,
1995; Compas et al., 1991; Ebata and Moos, 1995; Fanshawe and Burnett, 1991;
Kurdek, 1987; Patterson et al., 1983; Plancherel et al., 1993; Seiffge-Krenke,
1994a,b, 1995; Smith et al., 1990; Spirito et al., 1991; Tyszkowa, 1990).
Coping strategies often are discussed within an approach-withdrawal model
or within a problem-emotion focused model (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). Coping
strategies centered on problem solving are aimed at doing something to change
the stressful situation. Coping strategies centered on emotion refer to strategies
aimed at reducing psychological discomfort by simply avoiding the noxious stim-
ulus without trying to modify the situation. According to Seiffge-Krenke (1995),
in adolescents, the problem-solving coping mode is functional (seeking informa-
tion or advice, accepting social support, making efforts to solve the problem),
whereas the avoiding coping mode is dysfunctional (withdrawal, fatalistic atti-
tudes, avoidance). This latter mode has been observed mainly in children and
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 347

adolescents with psychiatric problems (Reinhard and Ott, 1994), and in adoles-
cents with depressive symptoms, low self-esteem, low social-support satisfaction
(Chan, 1995), and poor social adjustment (Tolor and Fehon, 1987).

Self-Estecm

In the stress literature, self-esteem has not been considered as often as coping
or social support as a protective factor. However, research has shown that individ-
uals with high self-esteem or a high feeling of control will adopt active coping
strategies focused on problems, whereas individuals with a low self-esteem will
adopt passive-avoidant coping styles focused on emotions (Thoits, 1995). In a
preadolescent sample, high self-esteem was correlated with active-positive coping
styles (Mantzicopoulos, 1990) and high social support (Hoffman et al., 1988).
Others have shown that low self-esteem is related to depression (Bettschart et al.,
1994; Rosenbaum-Asarnow etal., 1987), anxiety, and unsuccessful coping strate-
gies (Houston, 1977, in Seiffge-Krenke, 1995).

Participation in Social Activities

Involvement in social activities seems to be as important as academic pro-

grams for youth development. According to Holland and Andre (1987), social
activities help to foster personality development and socialization. They argue that
involvement in such activities offers young adolescents a channel to express their
energy in socially acceptable ways. Their results show clearly that social participa-
tion is highly correlated with self-esteem and control of perception. More recently,
Rae-Grant et al. (1989) have shown in a sample of 3294 children 4 to 16 years
old that participation in different social activities is related to a low incidence of
behavioral problems.
The goal of the present study is to examine the relative protective roles of
specific adolescent internal (self-esteem, coping) and some external (social sup-
port and social activities) resources on their experience of stress and depression.
Four groups were created by crossing indices of depressive symptoms and levels
of daily hassles: (1) well adjusted (low on both indices); (2) resilient (high on
level of daily hassles and low on depression); and (3) vulnerable (high on both
indices); (4) nonadjusted (low on level of daily hassles and high on depression).
As such, this study lies within the domain of developmental psychopathology
that is interested in buffering effects of different factors in the presence of different
at-risk environments. It has been reported repeatedly that individuals with the same
levels of environmental risk may have different developmental outcomes (good or
bad adjustment) and that individuals with different levels of risk may have the
same outcome (Cowan et al., 1996).
348 Dumtont and Provost

METHOD

Participants

Participants were 141 eight graders (M = 14 years; SD = 7 months) and

156 eleventh graders (M = 16 years and 8 months; SD = 8 months) from the
same school. The sample was recruited in 6 different classes for each level and
was equally divided between girls (n = 153) and boys (n = 144). The participants
came mostly from middle-class intact Caucasian French-speaking families (73%),
but some lived in divorced (23%) or other types of families (death of a parent,
foster family; 4%). Participation was voluntary and a consent form signed by the
adolescent and one parent was obtained. Most of the families contacted agreed to
participate (81% for 8th grade; 86% for llth grade). Questionnaires were admin-
istered collectively in classrooms under the supervision of a research assistant.

Measures

Daily Hassles

Daily hassles were assessed using a French and modified version of the Ado-
lescent Hassles Inventory (Bobo et al., 1986; translation, adaptation, and validation
by the Service universitaire de psychologie de l'enfant et de l'adolescent, Lausanne,
Switzerland, or SUPEA). This questionnaire assesses the frequency of daily has-
sles and makes a cognitive appraisal of the severity of the annoyance caused by the
situation described in each item (severity of daily hassles). The original version has
68 items chosen from the 117-item version for adults (Kanner et al., 1981). The
version used in our study was adapted for Swiss preadolescents and contains 59
items organized around different areas of development (self, family, peers, school,
future). Participants must first answer whether a given problem has occurred for
him/her in the preceding 6 months and whether this had some effect (4-point Likert
scale from 1 (not annoyed at all) to 4 (very annoyed). Frequency of daily hassles
was defined as the number of items described as an annoyance, whether small (1) or
big (3). The severity of daily hassles was defined, in concordence with Plancherel
et al. (1997), as the mean score of all of the 59 items. Alpha reliability of the
severity scale for our sample was .92.

Depression

Depression was assessed using a validated French translation (Bourque and

Beaudette, 1982) of the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck, 1978). This 21-item
questionnaire measures the severity of depression. Adolescents were asked to
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 349

evaluate each item on a 4-point Likert scale (from 0 to 3) indicating the level that
best described their feelings within the past 7 days.
Barrera and Garrison-Jones (1988) showed that, in a sample of adolescents
(12 to 18 years old) in school, scores of 16 and more can be associated with a
depressive state, whereas, in a clinical sample, a score of 11 or more is associated
with depression. The French version (mean age = 20 years) yielded a test-retest
correlation of .62 (p < .001) and an alpha reliability of .92 (Stanley and Hopkins,
1972). In our study, cutoff points from Barrera et al. (1988) were used to form
3 groups: under 9 points (nondepressive); 10 to 15 points (mildly depressive);
16 points and more (depressive).

Social Support

Social support was assessed by the Social Support Questionnaire (SSQ;

Sarason et al., 1987; translation and validation by DeMan et al., 1986). This
shortened version (SSQ-6) consists of 6 items from the original 27-item version
and was developed by Sarason et al. (1987). Adolescents were asked to identify
persons in their environment that can help in the situation described by the item.
They also were asked to evaluate on a 6-point scale their level of satisfaction with
the support they perceived, from 1 (very unsatisfied) to 6 (very satisfied). This
yielded 2 scores: the number of persons in their social network and the degree of
satisfaction with the support they perceived. This 6-item version has equivalent
alpha reliability to the original version (more than .90) for both scales.

Coping Strategies

Coping was assessed using the Ways of Coping Questionnaire (Folkman

and Lazarus, 1988; translation and validation by Mishara, 1987) containing 66
items designed to tap subjects' strategies used in coping with stressful situations.
The version used in this study is a 21-item shortened French version (Bouchard
et al., 1995). Each item was ranked on a 4-point Likert scale from 0 (not used) to
4 (very used). This version, tested with 1012 French Canadian adults, yielded a
3-factor structure (social-support seeking, positive appraisal/problem solving, and
avoidance). Alpha reliabilities were .85, .80, and .76, respectively. In the present
study, alpha reliabilities were .81, .81, and .67, respectively.

Self-Esteem

Self-esteem was assessed using a shortened 6-item version of the 36-item

original version of the Self-Perception Profile for Children (Harter, 1985). Partici-
pants were asked (1) to choose from 2 descriptions of an adolescent and (2) to rank
350 Dumont and Provost

from 1 (a bit like me) to 4 (exactly like me). In 4 samples of 3rd to 8th graders,
Harter reported alpha reliabilities from .78 to .84. In this study, the alpha was .84.

Social Activities

Social involvement was assessed using the Involvement Microsystem Scale

(Seidman et al., 1995). This 41-item questionnaire measures the degree of involve-
ment of the adolescent in the past 12 months on 5 different microsystems designed
to tap involvement with friends (9 items), family (6 items), school (9 items),
neighborhood (9 items), and church (8 items). Participants were asked to rate their
degree of involvement ranging from 1 (never or approximately never) to 6 (nearly
every day). Seidman et al. (1995) reported a factorial structure with varimax ro-
tation of 6 factors: (1) neighborhood-action involvement, (2) school involvement,
(3) family involvement, (4) sport/athletic involvement, (5) peer involvement, and
(6) neighborhood-social involvement. Ten-month test-retest correlations ranged
from .32 to .53. Alpha reliability scores ranged from .62 to .84. In our study, a
factorial analysis with varimax rotation yielded a 4-factor solution: F1, commu-
nal and religious activities; F2, family activities and socialization with neighbors;
F3, academic and social activities; F4, antisocial and illegal activities with peers.
Alpha scores were .80, .75, .60, and .62, respectively.

Formation of the Adjustment Groups

Herman-Stahl and Petersen (1996) have proposed 4 distinct groups of ado-

lescents, created by crossing indices of depressive symptoms and levels of stress:
(1) well adjusted (low on both indices), (2) resilient (high on level of stress and
low on depression), (3) vulnerable (high on both indices), and (4) nonadjusted. On
the basis of this procedure, adolescents in this study were classified into 4 groups
based on indices of both depressive symptoms and frequency of daily hassles.
Frequency of daily hassles was chosen because (1) Herman-Stahl and Petersen
used frequency of negative life events and (2) the correlation with degree of sever-
ity of daily hassles was very high (r = .89), indicating that both variables were
overlapping. However, whereas Herman-Stahl and Petersen (1996) divided their
groups according to a top one-third versus the remaining two-third cutoff point,
we elected to divide our groups on the basis of a somewhat more severe criterion.
Two levels of depression were created: The first level consisted of the top third of
the depression distribution and the second level was formed by the bottom third of
the depression distribution. With respect to the frequency of daily hassles, 2 levels
again were considered: the top third of the frequency distribution was considered
as high level of daily hassles whereas the bottom third of the frequency distribution
formed the low level of daily hassles. Because of this severity, only 3 groups were
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 351

kept on the basis of number of participants in each cell: (1) The well-adjusted
group consisted of adolescents scoring low on both indices (n = 84, 28% of the
sample); (2) the OF group contained participants high on level of daily has-
sles and low on depression (n = 48,16% of the sample); (3) the vulnerable group
included adolescents scoring high on both indices (n = 34, 11% of the sample).
Chi-square analyses revealed that age was randomly distributed across groups:
( X 2 [ 2 , N = 166] = .68, p = .71).

RESULTS

Results are presented in 2 sections. In the 1st section, analyses of correla-

tions are presented to check for possible overlapping variables. The 2nd section
presents a discriminant analysis designed to assess potential factors differentiating
the 3 groups.

Intercorrelations Between Variables

Organized according to classes of variables, Table I presents Pearson correla-

tions between all variables. A scanning of this table allows a first general conclusion
that most of these correlations are modest; therefore, variables in this study can
be, for the most part, considered independent enough to be used in later analyses.
Some exceptions to this general statement should be noted. First, the corre-
lation between number of daily hassles and their degree of severity is very high
(r = .89, p < .0001).
Intercorrelations between dimensions of coping are significant and positive.
However, only the correlation between social-support seeking and problem solving
is relatively high (r = .57, p < .0001). This suggests that ways of coping are
different parts of an organization of strategies that can be used in different contexts.
Correlations between buffering variables (coping, social support, and different
social activities) range from significant but modest to nonsignificant, indicating
that different ways of coping with stress can be used individually in later analyses.
Correlations between classes of variables are generally small. Two exceptions can
be pointed out. First, degree of daily hassles and depression (r = .56, p < .0001)
and frequency of daily hassles and depression (r = .47, p < .0001) are highly
correlated. This is consistent with research findings consistently showing a positive
relation between stress and depression. Also note that high, negative correlations
were found between self-esteem and depression (r = — .66, p < .0001) and self-
esteem and daily hassles (r = —.51 and —.45, p < .0001), suggesting that self-
esteem may be a protective factor against depression and stress.
Finally, Table I shows that satisfaction with social support is negatively related
to frequency of daily hassles (r = —. 11, p < .05) and to depressive symptoms
352 Dumont and Provost
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 353

(r = —.13, p < .05); satisfaction with social support also is positively correlated
with self-esteem (r = .23, p < .0001). These correlations, although significant,
are modest, suggesting that adolescents' satisfaction with social support may not
be as important a factor as often has been considered in the literature.

Discriminant Function Analysis

A hierarchical discriminant function analysis was performed to assess pre-

diction of membership in the 3 groups from the 9 variables (self-esteem, 3 coping
strategies, social support, and 4 areas of social activities). There was significant
separation among the 3 groups from self-esteem, problem-solving coping strate-
gies, and antisocial and illegal activities with peers (F[3, 6] = 30.18; p < .001).
Wilk's lambdas (A) for univariate analyses were .49 (p < .001), .41 (p < .001)
and .44 (p < .001), respectively.
The matrix of correlations between the 9 predictor variables and the 2 discrim-
inant functions shows that self-esteem is the primary predictor for the 1st discrim-
inant function, which accounts for 95% of the variance. The primary predictors
of the 2nd discriminant function (5% of the variance) are antisocial and illegal
activities with peers and problem-solving coping strategies. On the basis of all 9
variables, 70% of adolescents were correctly classified into the 3 original groups
(Table II). More specifically, both the well-adjusted group (72.4%) and the vulnera-
ble group (82.4%) were correctly classified; the resilient group showed a somewhat
lower percentage of correct classification (58.3%).
To further test discriminating power of the 3 significant variables, Duncan's
post hoc tests were performed. As can be seen in Table III, well-adjusted adoles-
cents have higher self-esteem than adolescents in the 2 other groups; in addition,
resilient adolescents have higher self-esteem than vulnerable adolescents. For the
2nd significant discriminating variables, antisocial and illegal activities with peers,
both resilient and vulnerable adolescents had higher scores than well-adjusted ado-
lescents. Finally, resilient adolescents had higher scores on problem-solving coping
strategies than did well-adjusted adolescents.

Table II. Classification Results from the Discriminant Function Analysis

Predicted Group Membership
Actual Group Number of Cases Well-Adjusted Resilient Vulnerable

Well-adjusted 87 63 20 4
(72.4%) (23.0%) (4.6%)
Resilient 48 14 28 6
(29.2%) (58.3%) (12.5%)
Vulnerable 34 1 5 28
(2.9%) (14.7%) (82.4%)
354 Dumont and Provost
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 355

Linear and quadratic trend analyses were performed to test possible trends for
each variable with respect to the 3 groups. Results showed a linear ( F [ 1 , 168] =
163.36, p < .001) and a quadratic (F[l, 168] = 17.78, p < .001) trend for self-
esteem. This suggests a linear curve between the 3 groups with a sharper slope
between the vulnerable and the resilient groups. A linear trend for antisocial and
illegal activities with peers also was found (F[l, 168] =9.62, p < .001), whereas
no trend was detected in problem-solving coping strategies.

DISCUSSION

Stress-Distress Relation

Results of this study show a high correlation between frequency of daily has-
sles and their perceived level of severity. This is in marked contrast to studies with
adults that have shown low correlations between the same 2 variables (DeLongis
etal., 1982; Dumont etal., 1998; Reich etal., 1988;Zarski, 1984). Thus, it seems
that the frequency and severity of daily small negative events are perceived dif-
ferently by adolescents and adults. Adolescents seem to be quite annoyed by the
frequency of little stresses they meet on an everyday basis, whereas adults seem
to be able to differentiate between daily life events that are difficult to avoid com-
pletely and severity of these annoyances that depends largely on the appraisal and
the personal resources of each individual.
This result has been observed constantly throughout the literature and suggests
the deleterious effect of stress on every aspect of psychological and physical health
(Burke and Weir, 1978; L.H. Cohen et al., 1987;Compasetal., 1989;Kanneretal.,
1987; Rowlison and Felner, 1988). Research on stress thus is still very important
and should be encouraged. One promising area of research concerns the analysis
of protective factors. This study has examined some of the most prominent ones
through a multifactorial approach.
Coping strategies also have been mentioned often in the stress literature. How-
ever, as with many other authors, our results suggest that one must be careful in
differentiating positive and negative coping strategies. We found relatively strong
positive relations between avoidance strategies and stress or distress and a nega-
tive correlation with self-esteem. It should be emphasized that this type of coping
(hoping for a miracle, accepting one's destiny, acting as if nothing really has hap-
pened, simply trying to forget, etc.) is used to lower psychological discomfort but
is not instrumental in resolving the problem. It seems quite clear that an adoles-
cent who adopts this kind of strategy will not be efficient in protecting himself or
herself against stress and will be at risk for developing depressive symptoms. This
is consistent with the observations by Ebata and Moos (1995), Herman-Stahl et al.
(1995), and Seiffge-Krenke (1994b) who found that adolescents with avoidant
coping strategies are more likely than adolescents with problem-solving coping
356 Dumont and Provost

strategies to develop psychological distress or problems in adaptation. This seems

to be true for other cultures because similar results have been reported in Chinese
adolescents (Chan, 1995). More recently, Hasting et al. (1996) have reported a
positive relation between avoidant strategies and externalizing disorders.
Self-esteem has been mentioned many times as one of the major factors
that can buffer the noxious effects of stress on psychological health; surprisingly,
it rarely has been studied empirically. Our results are consistent with previous
studies that reported high negative correlations between self-esteem and daily stress
(L. H. Cohen et al., 1987; Hoffman et al., 1988) and depression in youngsters
(Chan, 1995; Nunez et al., 1992; Rosenbaum-Asarnow et al., 1987).
The negative correlation between avoidance and self-esteem may provide
an interesting clue to the dynamics of the avoidance-distress relation. It seems
that adolescents with high self-esteem seldom use avoidance strategies and prefer
problem-solving strategies. Although this conclusion stems from correlations, it is
possible to hypothesize that adolescents with good self-esteem perceive themselves
with the capacity to react to the environment and therefore are confident in using
strategies that challenge the problem and help to modify the situation. These ado-
lescents appear to be less bothered by stress because they perceive that they have
control and are able to react positively and actively to their environment. Further-
more, self-esteem is positively correlated with involvement in community, family,
neighborhood, but negatively correlated with antisocial activities with peers. In
other words, adolescents who do not have a high self-esteem are more likely to
choose avoidant coping strategies (e.g., drug consumption) than adolescents who
have a high self-esteem and are involved in their community.
This study has introduced the idea that involvement in the community can be
a protective factor in the stress-distress relation. The results show negative correla-
tions between activities within the family or the neighborhood and the 2 measures
of stress and symptoms of depression. These results suggest that interactions with
members of the family and neighbors may be beneficial to youth social adjustment
in helping them to avoid stressful experiences or, at least, in making these expe-
riences less stressful. On the other hand, involvement in negative social or even
illegal activities (stealing, bullying, illegal use of alcohol or drugs) are positively
correlated with depression and stress. This is congruent with findings by Patterson
et al. (1983), who reported a negative correlation between substance use (cigarette,
alcohol, drugs) and problem solving within the family.

Protective Factors Differentiating Groups

The main goal of the present study was to examine the relative protective
roles of 4 internal and external resources of young adolescents on their levels of
stress and depression.
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 357

The results confirm what has been said previously. Self-esteem is the primary
predictor for the first discriminant function. This strongly suggests that personal
satisfaction and self-confidence in one's capacities are the best predictors of dif-
ferences between groups. This is specified further by Duncan's contrast analysis
followed by a quadratic trend analysis, which clearly indicate that well-adjusted
adolescents display a higher self-esteem than resilient adolescents who, in turn,
manifest a higher self-esteem than vulnerable adolescents.
It seems that having developed a positive personal perception and a strong
perception of control would guard against negative perceptions of daily stress-
ful situations, probably by building in the individual a solid impression that he
or she has the capacities to cope with these aspects of daily life. This is con-
cordant with findings by Herman-Stahl and Petersen (1996), who reported that
well-adjusted adolescents scored higher on approach-oriented coping, perceived
mastery, optimism, levels of intimacy with parents, good family relations, and so-
cial competencies than did the resilient vulnerable and negatively adjusted youth.
Furthermore, our results showing that the resilient group had a higher self-esteem
than the vulnerable group are also consistent with the results from Herman-Stahl
and Petersen (1996), who reported that their resilient group was distinguished from
the vulnerable group by characteristics such as optimism, positive relationships
with parents and peers, and active coping. Indeed, it seems from these results
that personal resources have stress-buffering effects to protect youth from the
deleterious effects of stress on psychological health.
The 2nd most prominent predictor for differentiating these 3 groups is in-
volvement in antisocial or illegal activities with peers. A linear trend analysis
demonstrated that vulnerable adolescents are higher on this variable than resilient
adolescents who, in turn, scored higher than the well-adjusted group. Furthermore,
Duncan's contrast analysis revealed a single contrast between the well-adjusted
group and the 2 other groups, indicating that vulnerable adolescents are involved in
certain activities with peers and can be considered at risk. The same holds true for
resilient adolescents, although the linear trend suggests that this group is midway on
the continuum from well-adjusted to vulnerable adolescents. This can be discussed
in light of the next variable to be entered in the discriminant function analysis.
The 3rd protective factor to discriminate between the 3 groups concerns
the positive coping strategy of problem solving. Surprisingly enough, however,
Duncan's contrast analysis showed that the resilient group uses this strategy sig-
nificantly more than the 2 other groups. An examination of the means revealed
that the well-adjusted group used this coping style less than the 2 other groups.
This is in marked contrast with the literature, which assumes that an active coping
style is part of the personal resources that an individual uses to buffer the noxious
effect of stress (Chan, 1995; Herman-Stahl et al., 1995; Seiffge-Krenke, 1994b).
Note, however, that positive coping strategies should be used as a function of char-
acteristics of specific situations—namely, the fact that they can be controlled, that
358 Dumont and Provost

they are predictable—as well as personal considerations such as the goal set by the
individual, their personal motivation, and so on. This would have to be clarified in
further research.
The discriminant analysis approach gives an opportunity to rank factors that
discriminate groups. In the present analysis, self-esteem has been shown to be
the most valuable variable to differentiate groups. This suggests that adolescents
with high self-esteem are likely to be confident of their abilities. On the other
hand, resilient adolescents seem to feel some discomfort about their capacity to
face difficult situations while appearing to be confident that an active approach to
problems may help them in lowering their experience of stress.
Note that social support did not significantly differentiate groups of ado-
lescents. This is clearly a surprising result because the literature has put much
emphasis on the buffering effects of social support for mental health. A close
examination of the results revealed that the vulnerable group did not use social
support as often as the 2 other groups did, although this difference did not reach
statistical significance. In our analyses, social support was analyzed together with
other variables that proved to be more influential on the differentiation of groups.
This is not to say that one should rule out social support from future research
designs but, as our results indicate, social support probably should be considered
with other factors that may have been neglected in the past.
The discriminant function analysis also reveals that the 3 groups created by
crossing depressive symptoms and frequency of daily hassles can be discriminated
easily. It should be restated that our method for contrasting groups was stricter
than that used by Herman-Stahl and Petersen (1996) because only the first and
the last thirds of the distribution were used. This resulted in the formation of
only 3 groups, the negatively adjusted group used by Herman-Stahl and Petersen
(1996) being too small in our own study. The discriminant function analysis is a
powerful tool to verify the validity of group creation. In our study, the analysis
suggests that both vulnerable and well-adjusted groups are clearly characterized
by the protective factors entered in the function analysis. In contrast, the resilient
group seems less specific, with a tendency to have some of its members be better
classified in the well-adjusted group. This observation suggests that resiliency
may be an intermediate concept between adaptation and maladaptation. This is
consistent with a recent discussion by Zimmerman and Arunkumar (1994), who
argued that the definition of resiliency should be refined in light of some results
suggesting that resilient youth simply may be identified incorrectly because their
maladaptive responses are not overt behavioral problems. As discussed before, our
resilient group had a tendency to be involved in at-risk peer interactions.
This investigation provides new information about the relative importance of
some protective factors against stress and depression in adolescents. Specifically,
it has shown that self-esteem is the prominent protective resource that youth can
use against daily negative life events. The results also suggest that problem-solving
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 359

coping strategies are instrumental in helping adolescents to avoid too much stress
and even depression. Moreover, our study has revealed that it is important to differ-
entiate positive and negative activities with peers, especially during adolescence.
Finally, our discussion has pointed out that the concept of resilience remains to be
clarified.
Two important directions for further research are suggested by the findings.
The first is for additional clarification of the importance of each of the protective
factors in the study of the relationship between stress and distress. The multivari-
able approach adopted in this study has proven to be fruitful. Future research should
use this approach together with a longitudinal method to determine the implica-
tions of protective factors over longer periods of time. The second is for further
clarification of the resilience concept. This study is limited to self-reports. It is
possible that the unclear classification of the resilient group stems from problems
in getting exact information from these adolescents who have problems in assess-
ing their own feelings. Future research should include other sources of reports,
such as teachers or observers.
There are 2 main limitations to this study. First, as Herman-Stahl and Petersen
(1996) have noted in their study, we only considered the internalizing disorders.
Future research should include a broader array of internalizing and externalizing
problems to avoid sampling bias. Second, we could not create a 4th group of
negatively adjusted adolescents. Our criteria were quite severe and even with 297
participants we could only find 6 negatively adjusted adolescents. Future research
may benefit from assessing clinical groups together with normative samples to
form this 4th group.

REFERENCES

Aldwin, C. M. (1994). Stress, Coping, and Development: An Integrative Perspective. Guilford Press,
New York.
Altshuler, J., and Ruble, D. (1989). Developmental changes in children's awareness of strategies for
coping with uncontrollable stress. Child Develop. 60: 1337-1349.
Aro, H., Hanninen, V., and Paronen, O. (1989). Social support, life events, and psychosomatic symptoms
among 14-16 year-old adolescents. Soc. Sci. Med. 29: 1051-1056.
Barrera, M. (1986). Distinction between social support concepts, measures, and models. Am, J.
Commun. Psychol. 14: 413-445.
Barrera, M., and Garrison-Jones, V. (1988). Properties of the Beck Depression Inventory as a screening
instrument for adolescent depression. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 16: 263-273.
Beck, A. T. (1978). Depression Inventory. Centre for Cognitive Therapy, Philadelphia.
Bettschart, W., Bolognini, M., Plancherel, B., Nunez, R., and Leidi, C. (1992). Evenements de vie
et sante psychique a la pre-adolescence: role du support social. Neuropsychiatrie Enfance 40:
421-430.
Bettschart, W., Nunez, R., Bolognini, M., and Plancherel, B. (1994). L'estime de soi a la pre-
adolescence: Une etude longitudinale. Nervure 7: 23-25.
Blanchard-Fields, f., and Coleman-Irion, J. (1988). Coping strategies from the perspective of two
developmental markers: Age and social reasoning. J. Genet Psychol. 149: 141-151.
Bobo, J. K., Gilchrist, L. D., Elmer, J. F., Snow, W. H., and Schinke, S. P. (1986). Hassles, role strain,
and peer relations in young adolescents. J. Early Adolesc. 6: 339-352.
360 Dumont and Provost

Bolognini, M., Plancherel, B., Nunez, R., and Bettschart, W. (1992). Milieu de vie et personnalite.
Quels sont les facteurs qui protegent les pre-adolescents du stress? Rev. Suisse Sociol. Vol: 339-
361.
Bouchard, G., Sabourin, S., Lussier, Y., Richer, C., and Wright, J. (1995). Nature des strategies
d'adaptation au sein des relations conjugales: Presentation d'une version abregee du Ways of
Coping Questionnaire. Rev. Can. Sci. Comport. 21: 371-377.
Bourque, P., and Beaudette, D. (1982). Etude psychometrique du questionnaire de depression de Beck
aupres d'un echantillon d'etudiants universitaires francophones. Rev. Can. Sci. Comport. 14:
211-218.
Burke, R. J., and Weir, T. (1978). Benefits to adolescents of informal helping relationships with their
parents and peers. Psychol. Rep. 42: 1175-1184.
Chan, D. W. (1995). Depressive symptoms and coping strategies among Chinese adolescents in Hong
Kong. J. Youth Adolesc. 24: 267-279.
Cohen, F. (1987). Measurement of coping. In Kasl, S. V., and Cooper, C. L. (eds.), Stress and Health:
Issues in Research Methodology. Wiley, New York, pp. 283-303.
Cohen, L. H., Burt, C. E., and Bjorck, J. P. (1987). Life stress and adjustment: Effects of life events
experienced by young adolescents and their parents. Develop. Psychol. 23: 583-592.
Cohen, S., and Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol. Bull.
98: 310-357.
Compas, B. E., Slavin, L. A., Wagner, B. M., and Vannatta, K. (1986). Relationship of life events and
social support with psychological dysfunction among adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 15: 205-221.
Compas, B. E. (1987). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence. Psychol. Bull. 101:
393-403.
Compas, B. E., Howell, D. C., Phares, V., Williams, R. A., and Giunta, C. T. (1989). Risk factors for
emotional/behavioral problems in young adolescents: A prospective analysis of adolescent and
parental stress and symptoms. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 57: 732-740.
Compas, B. E., Banez, G. A., Malcarne, V., and Worsham, N. (1991). Perceived control and coping
with stress: A developmental perspective. J. Soc. Issues 47: 23-34.
Copeland, E. P., and Hess, R. S. (1995). Differences in young adolescents' coping strategies based on
gender ethnicity. J. Early Adolesc. 15: 203-219.
Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., and Schulz, M. C. (1996). Thinking about risk and resilience in families.
In Hetherington, E. M., and Blechman, E. A. (eds.), Stress, Coping, and Resiliency in Children
and Families. Erlbaum, Hilsdale, NJ, pp. 1-38.
Daniels, D., and Moos, R. H. (1990). Assessing life stressors and social resources among adolescents:
Applications to depressed youth. J. Adolesc. Res. 5: 268-289.
DeLongis, A., Coyne, J. C., Dakof, G., Folkman, S., and Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Relationship of daily
hassles, uplifts, and major life events to health status. Health Psychol. 1: 119-136.
DeMan, A. I., Balkou, S., and Iglesisas, R. (1986). Une version canadienne francaise du questionnaire
sur le soutien social. Sante Ment. Que. 11: 199-202.
Dohrenwend, B. S., and Dohrenwend, B. P. (1981). Life stress and psychopathology. In Regier, D. A.,
and Allen, G. (eds.), Risk Factor Research in the Major Mental Disorders. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, DC, pp. 131-141.
Dub, E. L. F., and Tisane, J. (1989). The relation between stressful life events and adjustment in
elementary school children: The role of social support and social problem-solving skills. Child
Develop.60: 1412-1423.
Dubois, D. E. L., Fleeter, R. D., Brand, S., Adam, A., and Evens, E. G. (1992). A prospective study of
life stress, social support, and adaptation in early adolescence. Child Develop. 63: 542-557.
Dumont, M., Tarabulsy, G. M., Gagnon, J., Tessier, R., and Provost, M. (1998). Validation francaise
d'un inventaire des micro-stresseors de la vie quotidienne: Combinaison du "Daily Hassles Scale"
et du "Uplift Scale." J. Int. Psychol. 33: 57-71.
Ebata, A. T., and Moos, R. H. (1995). Personal, situational, and contextual correlates of coping in
adolescence. J. Res. Adolesc. 4: 99-125.
Fanshawe, J. P., and Burnett, P. C. (1991). Assessing school-related stressors and coping mechanisms
in adolescents. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 61: 92-98.
Folkman, S., and Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Ways of Coping Questionnaire: Research Edition. Consulting
Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 361

Garmezy, N. (1983). Stressors of childhood. In Garmezy, N., and Rutter, M. (eds.), Stress, Coping and
Development in Children. McGraw-Hill, Minneapolis, pp. 43-84.
Gersten, J. C., Langner, T. S., Eisenberg, J. G., and Simcha-Fagan, 0. (1977). An evaluation of the
etiologic role of stressful life-change events in psychological disorders. J. Heath Soc. Behav. 18:
228-244.
Goodyer, I. (1994). Les evenements existentiels dans l'enfance et l' adolescence. In Bolognini, M.,
Plancherel, B., Nunez R., and Bettschart, W. (eds.), Preadolescence, Theorie, Recherche et Clin-
ique. ESF, Paris, pp. 89-105.
Gore, S., and Eckenrode, J. (1996). Context and process in research on risk and resilience. In Haggerty,
R. J., Sherrod, L. R., Garmezy, N., and Rutter, M. (eds.), Stress, Risk, and Resilience in Chil-
dren and Adolescence: Processes, Mechanisms, and Interventions. Cambridge, University Press,
Cambridge, UK, pp. 19-62.
Harter, S. (1985). Manual for the Self-Perception Profile for Children. University of Denver, Denver,
CO.
Hasting, T. L., Anderson, S. J., and Kelley, M. L. (1996). Gender differences in coping and daily stress
in conduct-disordered and non-conduct-disordered adolescents. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess.
18:213-226.
Heitzmann, C. A., and Kaplan, R. M. (1988). Assessment of methods for measuring social support.
Health Psychol. 7: 75-109.
Herman-Stahl, M., and Petersen, A. C. (1996). The protective role of coping and social resources for
depressive symptoms among young adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 25: 733-753.
Herman-Stahl, M. A., Stemmler, M., and Petersen, A. C. (1995). Approach and avoidant coping:
Implications for adolescent mental health. J. Youth Adolesc. 24: 649-665.
Hoffman, M. A., Ushpiz, V, and Levy-Shiff, R. (1988). Social support and self-esteem in adolescence.
J. Youth Adolesc. 17: 307-316.
Holland, A., and Andre, T. (1987). Participation in extracurricular activities in secondary school: What
is known, what needs to be known? Rev. Educ. Res. 57: 437—466.
Holmes, T. H., and Rahe, R. H. (1967). The social readjustment of stress. J. Psychosom. Res. 11:
213-218.
Houston, J. P. (1977). Cheating behavior, anticipated success-failure, confidence, and test importance.
J. Educ. Psychol. 69: 55-60.
Johnson, J. H. (1986). Life Events as Stressors in Childhood and Adolescence. Sage, Newbury Park,
CA.
Kanner, A. D., Coyne, J. C., Schaefer, C., and Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Comparisons of two modes of
stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. J. Behav. Med. 4: 1-39.
Kanner, A. D., Feldman, S. S., Weinberger, D. A., and Ford, M. E. (1987). Uplifts, hassles, and
adaptational outcomes in early adolescents. J. Early Adolesc. 7: 371-394.
Kurdek, L. A. (1987). Gender differences in the psychological symptomatology and coping strategies
of young adolescents. J. Early Adolesc. 7: 395-410.
Lazarus, S. R. (1966). Psychological Stress and the Coping. MacGraw-Hill, New York.
Lazarus, S. R., and Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal and Coping. Springer, New York.
Mantzicopoulos, P. (1990). Coping with school failure: Characteristics of students employing successful
and unsuccessful coping strategies. Psychol. Schools 27: 138-143.
Mischara, B. (1987). Traduction Francaise du Ways of Coping Checklist. Unpublished manuscript,
UQAM, Montreal.
Nunez, R., Plancherel, B., Bolognini, M., and Bettschart, W. (1992). Mental heath, stress and protective
factors in early adolescence: Longitudinal study over 3 years. Med. Mind 7: 37-62.
Patterson, J. M., McCubbin, H., and Needle, R. H. (1983). A-Cope. Adolescent-Coping Orientation
for Problem Experiences. Family Stress Coping and Health Program. University of Wisconsin,
Madison.
Plancherel, B., Nunez, R., Bolognini, M., Leidi, C., and Bettschart, W. (1992). L'evaluation des
eve'nements existentiels comme predicteurs de la sante' psychique a la preadolescence. Rev. Eur.
Psychol. Appl. 42: 229-239.
Plancherel, B., Bolognini, M., Nunez, R., and Bettschart, W. (1993). Comment les pne-adolescents
font-ils face aux difficultes? Presentation d'une version fran9aise du questionnaire A-Cope. Rev.
Suisse Psychol. 52: 31-43.
362 Dumont and Provost

Plancherel, B., Bolognini, M., and Nunez, R. (1994). L'hypothese de l'effet buffer a la pr6adolescence.
In Bolognini, M., Plancherel, B., Nunez, R., and Bettschart, W. (eds.), Preadolescence: Theorie,
Recherche et Clinique. ESF, Paris, pp. 159-172.
Plancherel, B., Bolognini, M., Bettschart, W., Dumont, M., and Halfon, O. (1997). Influence comparee
des evenements existentiels et des tracas quotidiens sur la sante psychique a la pr6adolescence.
Neuropsychiatrie Enfance Adolesc. 45: 126-138.
Provost, M. (1995). Le Soutien Social: Quelques Facettes d'une Notion a Explorer. Editions Behaviora,
Quebec.
Rae-Grant, N., Thomas, H., Offord, D., and Boyle, J. (1989). Risk, protective factors, and the prevalence
of behavioral and emotional disorders in children and adolescents. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. 28:
262-268.
Reich, W. P., Parrella., D. P., and Filstead, W. J. (1988). Unconfounding the hassles scale: External
sources versus internal responses to stress. J. Behav. Med. 11: 239-249.
Reinhard, H., and Ott, G. (1994). Stress scolaire et personnalite'. In Bolognini, M., Plancherel, B.,
Nunez, R., and Bettschart, W. (eds.), Preadolescence: Theorie, Recherche et Clinique. ESF, Paris,
pp. 107-117.
Roos, P. E., and Cohen, L. H. (1987). Sex role and social support as moderators of life stress adjustment.
J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 52: 576-585.
Rosenbaum-Asarnow, J., Carlson., G. A., and Guthrie, D. (1987). Coping strategies, self-perceptions,
hopelessness, and perceived family environments in depressed and suicidal children. J. Consult.
Clin. Psychol. 55: 361-366.
Rowlison, R. T, and Felner, R. D. (1988). Major life events, hassles, and adaptation in adolescence:
Confounding in the conceptualisation and measurement of life stress and adjustment revisited.
J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 55: 432-444.
Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children's responses to stress and disadvantage. In Kent,
M. W., and Rolf, J. E. (eds.), Primary Prevention of Psychopathology. Vol 3. Social Competence
in Children. University of New England, Henniker, NH, pp. 49-74.
Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., Shearin, E., and Pierce, G. R. (1987). A brief measure of social support:
Practical and theoretical implications. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 4: 497-510.
Seidman, E., LaRue, A., Aber, J. L., Mitchell, C., Feinman, J., Yoshikawa, H., Comtois, K. A., Golz, J.,
Miller, R. L., Ortiz-Torres, B., and Roper, G. C. (1995). Development and validation of adolescent-
perceived microsystem scales: Social support, daily hassles, and involvement. Am. J. Commun.
Psychol. 23: 355-388.
Seiffge-Krenke, I. (1994a). Le coping al Padolescence: age, sexe et difference culturelle. In Bolognini,
M., Plancherel, B., Nunez, R., and Bettschart, W. (eds.), Preadolescence: Theorie, Recherche et
Clinique. ESF, Paris, pp. 173-183.
Seiffge-Krenke, I. (1994b). Les modes d'adjustement aux situations stressantes du developpement:
Comparaison d'adolescents normaux et d'adolescents perturbes. Orientat. Scol. Prof. 23: 313-
327.
Seiffge-Krenke, I. (1995). Stress, Coping, and Relationships in Adolescence. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L., and Ptacek, J. (1990). Conjunctive moderator variables in vulnerability and
resiliency research: Life stress, social support and coping skills, and adolescent sport injuries.
J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 58: 360-370.
Spirito, A., Stark, L. J., Grace, N., and Stamoulis, D. (1991). common problems and coping strategies
reported in childhood and early adolescence. J. Youth Adolesc. 20: 531-544.
Stanley, J. C., and Hopkins, K. D. (1972). Educational and Psychological Measurement and Evaluation.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Swearingen, E. M., and Cohen, L. H. (1985). Life events and psychological distress: A prospective
study of young adolescents. Develop. Psychol. 21: 1045-1054.
Thoits, P. A. (1983). Dimensions of life events that influence psychological distress: An evaluation
and synthesis of the literature. In Kaplan, H. B. (ed.), Psychosocial Stress: Trends in Theory and
Research. Academic Press, New York, pp. 33-103.
Thoits, P. A. (1995). Stress, coping, and social support processes: Where are we? What next? J. Health
Soc. Behav. 53-79.
Tolor, A., and Fehon, D. (1987). Coping with stress: A study of male adolescents' coping strategies as
related to adjustment. J. Adolesc. Res. 2: 33-42.
Resilience, Stress, and Depression in Adolescents 363

Tyszkowa, M. (1990). Coping with difficult school situations and stress resistance. In Bosma, H.,
and Jackson, S. (eds.), Coping and Self-Concept in Adolescence. Springer-Verlag, New York,
pp. 187-201.
Wagner, B. M., and Compas, B. E. (1990). Gender, instrumentality, and expressivity: Moderators of
the relation between stress and psychological symptoms during adolescence. Am. J. Commun.
Psychol. 18: 383-406.
Wheaton, B. (1985). Models for the stress-buffering functions of coping resources. J. Heath Soc. Behav.
26,352-364.
Wertlieb, D., Weigel, C., and Feldstein, M. (1987). Stress, social support, and behavior symptoms in
middle childhood. J. Clin. Child Psychol. 16: 204-211.
Zarski, J. J. (1984). Hassles and health: A replication. Health Psychol. 3: 243-251.
Zimmerman, M. A., and Arunkumar, R. (1994). Resiliency research: Implications for schools and
policy. Soc. Policy Rep. Soc. Res. Child Develop. 8: 1-17.