susceptibility to negative health outcomes. In addition, mention has been made in some studies of the role of personal resources as moderators in the stressor-strain relationship (Cooper & Davidson, 1987; Fletcher, 1991; Lazarus, 1966; Rice, 1991; Karasek, 1979; Israel et aI, 1989). Two constructs that have been extensively investigated in this regard are social support and coping.
1.6.1 Coping
Research into work related stress has in the past been influenced by an analysis of the components of the stress process. More commonly now, stress is seen as interactional in nature (Dewe, 1991), involving a "transaction between the individual and the environment" (Dewe, 1989). Account therefore needs to be taken of the cognitive processes that mediate the relationship between stressors and strains. Two such processes are appraisal and coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), which may specifically influence health behaviours, both beneficial and deleterious, and subsequent psychophysiologic responses (Nowack, 1991). The appraisal process refers to a "perceived demand which taxes or exceeds the physical or psychological resources of the individual"; in the context of work related stress, organisational demand. The coping process refers to "cognitive or behavioural efforts to deal with, reduce, or tolerate excess demand" (Folkman, 1984). Recent literature and research on the relationship between stressors and indicators of health status emphasise the considerable mediating function of coping processes (Nowack, 1991). As Shouksmith (1986) notes, the impact of stressors can be reduced by developing more effectual coping responses. Dewe (1 989) suggests that the benefit of defining stress using these concepts is that it focuses on processes (appraisal and coping), and thus offers opportunities for further understanding of the stress transaction between the individual and the environment.
There is a general acknowledgment in the literature of the importance of coping in the stressor-strain relationship, however as some researchers note (Edwards, 1988; Dewe, Cox & Fergusson, 1993), there is a lack of general consensus on the precise nature of coping and the means by which it influences stress related outcomes.
A number of theoretical approaches to the understanding of the coping process have been identified in the literature. F or instance, coping has been viewed as a psychoanalytic process suggesting that individuals utilise "realistic thoughts and actions" to address over-taxing demands (Edwards, 1988). Another approach (noted above) regards coping as a reflection of a personal trait or style such as, hardiness (Ouellette-Kobasa, 1988), locus of control (Spector, 1982), Type A behaviour (Cooper & Baglioni, 1988; Payne, 1988) and sense of coherence (Antonovsky, 1987). In addition, coping has been perceived as a sequence of stages (e.g. Kubler-Ross, 1969) or as a classification of coping strategies such as problem-focused versus emotion-focused coping (e.g. Folkman, Schaefer & Lazarus, 1980; Lazarus & Launier,
1978; Moos & Billing, 1982). These approaches are not without their critics (see Edwards, 1988; Payne, 1988), however Dewe et al (1993) suggest that from these original frameworks, the nature of coping can be seen as that of an integrative process concerned with relationships between the individual and hislher environment.
Effective coping may be related to social support (Thoits, 1986). Kasl and Wells (1985) note that it has been found that people with fewer resources or lower marital support use ineffective coping strategies (ignoring, avoidance) and these strategies are associated with higher levels of psychological distress.
1.6.2 Social Support
As noted earlier, Sutherland and Cooper (1988) suggest that social relationships, are important interpersonal factors· in the work environment. There have been a considerable array of models and outcomes proposed to provide a theoretical framework for the study of the "existence, number and frequency" of social relationships (House, Umberson & Landis, 1988). The term social support is generally applied to a broad range of conceptualisations of social relationships and how they
work. Due to the somewhat unwieldy nature of the social support construct, searching for a unitary definition is somewhat meaningless, and most research endorses a multidimensional view of support.
Despite the equivocal nature of the conceptual and operational definitions of social support, reliable associations are generally found with psychological and physical health outcomes. Social relationships have long been believed to be beneficial to health and be protective against disease and even death (e.g. Durkheim, 1951). Significant relationships between low social support and high incidence of morbidity and mortality are consistently found (Shumaker & Hill, 1991). There is considerable research that documents the psychological and physical benefits of social support (e.g. Cohen 1988; Cohen & Wills 1985; Taylor 1990), with social support linked to poorer psychiatric morbidity, suicide, clinical depression, state and trait anxiety and self reported mental health (Broadbent, Kaplan, Sherman, Wagner, Schoenbach, Grimson, Heyden, Tibblin & Gehlbach, 1983; Cohen & Wills, 1985; Gottlieb, 1983). A number of prospective, population-based studies have consistently shown the beneficial effects of social support on mortality rates (Berkman & Syme, 1979; Blazer, 1982; House, Robbins & Metzner, 1982; Orth-Gomer & Johnson, 1987; Shoenback, Kaplan, Friedman & Kleinbaum, 1986).
These findings raise the issue of whether the relationship between social support and health outcomes is positive because support enhances health and well-being irrespective of stress level (direct or main effects model) or because support protects from the negative effects of stressful events (buffering effects model). With regard to work related stress, both main effects (Ganster, Fusilier, & Mayes, 1986) and buffering effects (Haynes & Feinleib, 1980; LaRocco et al, 1980; Welin, Svardsud, Anderpec, Tibblin, Tibblin, Larsson, & Wilhelms, 1985) have been found. Still others have found that greater social support enhanced the relationship between Stressors and strains (Beebr, 1976; Kaufman & Beehr, 1986).
There is little evidence to suggest which sources of social support are most effectual. Some studies have shown that supervisor support tends to be the most salutogenic
(Kirmeyer & Dougherty, 1988; Haynes & Feinleib, 1980; see also Kasl & Wells, 1985), while others have found co-worker support an important factor in the stressor strain relationship (LaRocco et aI, 1980). Support from spouse, family and friends has also been shown to effect work related stress outcomes (Ganster et al, 1986). Ganster and Victor (1988) in a review of social support and health, note that in studies that found buffering effects, support from supervisors tended to show the strongest effects followed by support from co-workers.