Talk:Coping skill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Psychology (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 NA  This redirect does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Notion of stress[edit]

The section "Coping Skills" seems to refer to the usage of coping skills as a remedy for stress alone. I suggest replacing the word "stress" with the word "problem". Dursty (talk) 02:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

"Stress" is operationally defined in the original literature and has a speific meaning in the context of theories in health psychology. "Problems" has no operational definition in most psychological research and therefore remains fuzzy and vague. If a more broad term is to be used it should be well defined in original research or theoretical publications and it should be a term used in the original publications in reference to coping. I do not believe that this article would be a good place to create new theoretical definitions of well established concepts.


The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to not merge Oldag07 (talk) 03:03, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Creating the section...
6birc (talk) 01:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Oppose I believe the distinctions are significant. Coping skills are many small tools, which may or may not be a part of an overall coping strategy. No merge without consensus. Vaoverland (talk) 01:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Oppose I also think that that the distinctions are significant. Should be left apart. User:ericroosma 11:17, 10, April, 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 15:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC).

Oppose The article on coping strategies discusses Karen Horney's psyhoanalytic/psyhodynamic theories. She specifically discusses interpersonal dynamics and her ideas relate to psyhoanalytic theories of personality. The article on coping skills discusses responses to stressors from a health psyhology perspective based on the theories of stress, appraisal, and coping proposed by Lazarus and Folkman. The focus is on cognitive-behavioral theories and the analysis of behavior. The fact that both use the word coping as part of their terminology is irrelevant. These topics would not make sense to be merged together as if they were part of a single construct. The article on coping skills does need major editing for accuracy and references. Some of the statements are fuzzy and sound like poor interpretations of original research. This article should be merged with "Coping (psyhology)." I am somewhat unfamiliar with Karen Horney's psychoanalytic theories but I assume that the coping strategies article could also be cleaned up (possibly merged into an article on her theories of personality) 2:19, 12, April, 2010

Lazarus's theories have become known as the "Transactional Model of Stress and Coping."

The paragraph on Harmful Coping Methods is subjective. It does not lend itself to a forum of information such as wiki.

Oppose I propose that the various articles on this subject area of coping be saved. The whole area of mental insufficiencies and disease is far too much researched and therefore emphasized. This is partly due to the long lasting and far reaching roots in the history of psychology and dates back to the time of Freud & psychoanalysis. For that exact reason one can find a multitude of articles on eg. defence mechanisms - the mostly unconscious counterpart for coping mechanisms/skills - whereas information and distinctions regarding coping are hard to find. In favor of an emphasis on the positive and action oriented vs. problem seeking and explanation oriented approach to problems I oppose the merging of the concepts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minea (talkcontribs) 20:52, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.