Coping and its association with psychological adjustment: Differences between first-, second-, and third-plus generation adolescents.

INTRODUCTION: Adolescents with an immigrant background, whether first-generation (born abroad) or second-generation (at least one parent born abroad), face challenges that could compromise their psychological adjustment compared to their third-plus generation peers. Yet, many are developing positively despite the presence of adversity. To understand what contributes to these adolescents' resilience, it can be useful to study the coping strategies they use. METHODS: A total of 1036 Canadian secondary school students participated in this quantitative cross-sectional study (Mage = 12.9; 56% females; 26% first-generation; 34% second generation; 39% third-plus generation). Coping strategies (coping orientation to problems experienced inventory) were assessed and their differentiated associations with self-esteem, anxiety (Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders), and depressive symptoms (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale) were analyzed through path analysis and invariance testing. RESULTS: First-generation adolescents reported more acceptance/reinterpretation and substance use than second- and third-plus generation adolescents. First- and second-generation adolescents reported using religion more than third-plus generation adolescents. First-generation adolescents used self-distraction more often than second-generation adolescents, who used it more often than third-plus generation. The use of humor was more prevalent in second-generation adolescents compared with their third-plus generation peers. In addition, some associations between coping strategies and psychological adjustment differed across generations. In first-generation adolescents, behavioral disengagement was significantly associated with fewer anxiety symptoms. The same trend was observed in second-generation adolescents who used self-distraction. These avoidant strategies are generally associated with poor psychological adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds new knowledge about differences across generations in the coping strategies used by adolescents to deal with stress. Further practical implications are discussed.

Profiles of Anxious and Depressive Symptoms Among Adolescent Boys and Girls: Associations with Coping Strategies.

Most existing studies investigating profiles of anxious and depressive symptoms in adolescent boys and girls do not consider the high cooccurrence between them, which prevents from identifying how heterogeneous groups might distinctly use coping strategies. To address this gap, the current study relies on a sample of 976 adolescents (56.0% girls (n = 547), aged 12-15 y.o., M = 12.92, SD = 0.75) to identify profiles of self-reported internalizing symptoms while properly disaggregating youth's global levels of internalizing symptoms from their specific levels of anxious and depressive symptoms. The study also assesses whether similar profiles will be identified with the same frequency among boys and girls, as well as the associations between profile membership and coping strategies (problem-solving, social support, cognitive restructuring, cognitive avoidance, and behavioral avoidance) and whether these associations vary between sexes. Bifactor-confirmatory factor analyses confirmed the presence of a global internalizing factor and six specific factors reflecting anxious and depressive symptoms. Latent profile analyses identified three similar profiles among boys and girls but with different prevalence: Low internalizing symptoms (29.97% (n = 164) girls; 70.77% (n = 304) boys), Internalizing and specific anxious symptoms (40.15% (n = 220) girls, 14.75% (n = 63) boys), and Internalizing and specific depressive symptoms (29.86% (n = 163) girls, 14.48% (n = 62) boys). Girls in the Internalizing and specific anxious profile reported more frequent use of four coping strategies compared to boys (problem-solving, social support, cognitive restructuring, and cognitive avoidance). Among boys and girls, the Internalizing and specific depressive profile was associated with the least strategic use of coping strategies (low problem-solving, social support, and cognitive restructuring, and high cognitive and behavioral avoidance). The Internalizing and specific anxious profile was associated with high levels of all coping strategies (except behavioral avoidance). Overall, the study demonstrates that disaggregating global and specific internalizing symptoms allow identifying qualitatively distinct profiles, which then raised questions on the efficacy of the coping strategies used by youth with an Internalizing and specific anxious profile. These results support the adoption of a transdiagnostic approach of treatment based on a holistic representation of all aspects of adolescent boys' and girls' internalizing symptoms to better accompany them in the selection of their coping strategies.