5 results
23 - Income, Income Inequality, Community, and the Development of Coping
- from Part V - Social Contexts and the Development of Coping
- Edited by Ellen A. Skinner, Portland State University, Melanie J. Zimmer-Gembeck, Griffith University, Queensland
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Development of Coping
- Published online:
- 22 June 2023
- Print publication:
- 06 July 2023, pp 560-580
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter describes the development, refinement, and key guiding insights of the Reformulated Adaptation to Poverty-Related Stress (APRS) model. The APRS model elucidates how children (and adults) cope with and adapt to the plethora of stressful exposures and conditions that comprise poverty’s developmental context, and why coping in this stressful context often differs from coping found in less stressful developmental contexts. The chapter articulates implications of the APRS for research that takes context seriously and for interventions that meet children where they are; help them grow broad, flexible coping repertoires; develop the ability to differentiate among domains of stress that require different coping approaches; and learn to tailor one’s coping responses to the type of stressor being encountered. In this way, the APRS can guide researchers and interventionists to dump the deficit model of poor people and embrace the possibilities opened by an appreciation for the remarkable adaptiveness of humans.
A multiple levels of analysis examination of the performance goal model of depression vulnerability in preadolescent children
- Jason José Bendezú, Alaina Wodzinski, John E. Loughlin-Presnal, Jesse Mozeko, Sierra Cobler, Martha E. Wadsworth
-
- Journal:
- Development and Psychopathology / Volume 34 / Issue 1 / February 2022
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 14 September 2020, pp. 241-261
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
If performance goals (i.e., motivation to prove ability) increase children's vulnerability to depression (Dykman, 1998), why are they overlooked in the psychopathology literature? Evidence has relied on self-report or observational methods and has yet to articulate how this vulnerability unfolds across levels of analysis implicated in stress–depression linkages; for example, hypothalamic–pituitaryadrenal axis (HPA), sympathetic nervous system (SNS). Utilizing a multiple-levels-of-analysis approach (Cicchetti, 2010), this experimental study tested Dykman's goal orientation model of depression vulnerability in a community sample of preadolescents (N = 121, Mage = 10.60 years, Range = 9.08–12.00 years, 51.6% male). Self-reports of performance goals, attachment security, and subjective experience of internalizing difficulties were obtained in addition to objective behavioral (i.e., task persistence) and physiologic arousal (i.e., salivary cortisol, skin conductance level) responses to the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) and two randomly assigned coping conditions: avoidance, distraction. Children with performance goals reported greater internalizing difficulties and exhibited more dysregulated TSST physiologic responses (i.e., HPA hyperreactivity, SNS protracted recovery), yet unexpectedly displayed greater TSST task persistence and more efficient physiologic recovery during avoidance relative to distraction. These associations were stronger and nonsignificant in the context of insecure and secure attachment, respectively. Findings illustrate a complex matrix of in-the-moment, integrative psychobiological relationships linking performance goals to depression vulnerability.
4481 Better Together Harrisburg: Community-Driven Research Day
- Andrea Murray, Martha Wadsworth, Jennifer Kraschnewski, Kathleen Best, Carmen Henry-Harris
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 4 / Issue s1 / June 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 July 2020, pp. 81-82
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The overall goal of the Community-Engaged Research Core, supported by the Penn State Clinical and Translational Science Institute, is to invest in opportunities that promote collaboration between researchers and communities. Research in which community members are participating in the research process will more likely lead to reducing health disparities when compared to more traditional approaches. This abstract describes a community research day that brought researchers and community-based organizational leaders together to discuss critical areas of research. We aim to highlight a successful approach for how to work with a community, particularly one that has been distrustful of research, to facilitate and support collaborations between academic researchers and community-based organizational leaders (CBOs). Community-based organizational leaders are often the most knowledgeable individuals when it comes to identifying and discerning the needs and research priorities of their communities and they are generally in the best positions to help build greater trust between academic researchers and communities. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A Community Research Day Steering Committee was formed in the spring of 2018 and consisted of 10 community-based organizational leaders from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, two Penn State University staff, and one Penn State University faculty member. The Steering Committee’s purpose was to design, plan, and execute an event (Better Together: Community Driven Awareness) in which community-organizational leaders and faculty researchers came together to discuss possible research collaborations to improve community health. The Steering Committee participated in bi-monthly planning meetings leading up to the event, Better Together: Community-Driven Awareness. During these planning meetings, members determined that mental health and nutrition were two critical areas deserving of more attention from research within their geographical community. Organizations were asked to identify sub-categories within mental health and nutrition that they saw as most relevant to their communities. The sub-categories that they selected became the theme topics for round table discussions at the main event. This information was also used to determine which academic researchers to invite to the event, based on scientific expertise. In addition to selecting these topics for table discussions, the Steering Committee provided advice on the agenda and program materials. The agenda for Better Together: Community-Driven Awareness featured a presentation from a successful collaboration between a faculty member and a community-based organization whose project was centered around suicide prevention in the school system. After the presentation, researchers and CBOs sat at round tables for facilitated discussions about their table’s theme. The facilitated discussions fostered new relationships and led to collaborations outside of the event. Following the round-table discussions, there was a presentation about funding and next steps. Lastly, feedback forms were given to each attendee to assess their experience of the event and to better understand what to improve upon for the future. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Following the Community-Driven Awareness event, the Community-Engaged Research Core at Penn State released a call for proposals for planning grants to be awarded to faculty/community-based organization teams. These grants were intended to build capacity for externally-funded research that seeks to address important community-identified research questions. The internal grants support meetings to discuss mutual interests, develop research questions, identify leaders, conduct literature reviews, and collect pilot data. A team must have included, at a minimum, one Penn State faculty researcher and one community-based organizational leader as co-principal investigators. In the proposal, the team was asked to describe its preliminary research question, the work to be accomplished during the planning period, anticipated outcome(s) and deliverables, and preliminary ideas for seeking future external funding. A two-page narrative briefly described how the team members’ expertise/experience/constituencies would address the specified research question. In addition, the team provided a budget and budget justification. Planning grants ranged from $500-$5,000. Funds were allocated for a 6-12 month period. After the call was sent out, seven proposals were submitted and three were selected for external funding. Proposal topics included: * Exploring the Mechanism of Engagement in HIV Testing, Prevention, and Care Among African American and Hispanic/Latino Men who Have Sex with Men * Educator Translation of a Universal Social-Emotional Learning Program in School Practice * Growing Nutritious Communities: Gardening to increase access to and knowledge about fresh fruits and vegetables among residents in South Harrisburg, Hall Manor community. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: There are several academic institutions that have implemented similar events whose goal is to bring together academic researchers and community-based organizational leaders. To our knowledge, this is one of a few examples of an event that was developed from the ground up by a committee comprised mostly of community organization leaders. The community leaders guided the decisions made in all phases of the event design from determining the research themes to providing input on program materials. Additionally, our Steering Committee garnered the interest and attendance from over 20 community participating organizations, which attests to their commitment and dedication to seeing this event through from beginning to end. The feedback received from the event was overwhelmingly positive. Both academic researchers and community-based organizational leaders expressed their appreciation for an event that brought both parties together in a space where they felt comfortable to share ideas and knowledge. When asked how we could improve this event in the future, most attendees shared that they wanted more time and more opportunities to connect. One limitation of the event noted by attendees was that attendees were not able to sign up for the round table discussions themselves but were placed strategically at them by our Steering Committee. Therefore, at our next event, attendees will be able to select their tables and determine which themed topic they prefer to participate in. Lastly, we are considering how to best summarize the ideas that are generated from these round table discussions in a way that can be shared with the larger group and in a way that might foster collaborations outside of the event.
3133 Building Capacity for Community Engaged Research: Penn State University’s Faculty Fellowship Program
- Martha Ellen Wadsworth, Jennifer L. Kraschnewski, Gina M. Brelsford, Deepa L. Sekhar
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 3 / Issue s1 / March 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 March 2019, pp. 84-85
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To build capacity for community engaged, translational research in faculty across the university. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Each year, the Community Engagement Research Core (CERC) of the Penn State CTSI invites applications for one to two Community Engagement Faculty Fellowships. Applicant teams are comprised of a junior or mid-level investigator seeking to expand their work into the CEnR arena under the mentorship of a senior investigator with expertise in community engaged scholarship. The fellow must develop a plan for the mentoring year, including a timeline, activities to be undertaken together, knowledge to be acquired, deliverables, and a budget. The funding supports two course releases or the clinical equivalent for the fellow, and a small budget to support the mentor’s research program. Proposals are evaluated using NIH scientific merit criteria. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We are in our second year of the fellowship program. Two highly qualified fellows are currently working with established community-based mentors. The 2017-2018 fellowship team showcases how an effective mentor-fellow partnership can help move a fellow’s work along the translational spectrum. By working with her mentor, our first fellow’s research has expanded from basic discovery science in a university hospital to development of a neonatal intensive care unit intervention to be employed with parents in the community. The 2018-2019 scholar, who utilized the community engagement research core (CERC) of the PSU CTSI in preparation of a PCORI grant, has since received the PCORI award and is working with her mentor to bring her innovative mental health screenings to the public schools. We are currently evaluating applications for the third year of the program, and please to have engaged applicants from across several Penn State campuses and disciplines. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The fellowship is enjoying early success in terms of fellow productivity, expanding translational research expertise, and fueling interest across the Penn State campuses in community engagement research. Future work will focus on sustainability planning for this type of program, metrics for tracking success, and plans for integrating fellows into a growing community of engaged scholars at the university.
Children's vagal regulatory capacity predicts attenuated sympathetic stress reactivity in a socially supportive context: Evidence for a protective effect of the vagal system
- Brian C. Wolff, Martha E. Wadsworth, Frank H. Wilhelm, Iris B. Mauss
-
- Journal:
- Development and Psychopathology / Volume 24 / Issue 2 / May 2012
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 17 April 2012, pp. 677-689
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Social support and vagal regulatory capacity (VRC), an index of flexible vagal responses during various types of stress, are linked to attenuated stress responding and positive health outcomes. Guided by the polyvagal perspective, we tested whether children's VRC is associated with attenuated sympathetic nervous system (SNS) stress reactivity in socially supportive conditions. Sixty-one 4- to 5-year-old children living in poverty underwent two standardized laboratory stress induction procedures. Cardiac vagal reactivity (respiratory sinus arrhythmia) to a first set of stressors (social, cognitive, physical, and emotional) indexed VRC. During a second set of stressors, participants were randomly assigned to a supportive or nonsupportive social context, and cardiac sympathetic reactivity (preejection period) was assessed. We hypothesized VRC would predict lower SNS stress reactivity, but only in the socially supportive context. Children with high VRC showed attenuated SNS stress reactivity in the socially supportive context compared to children with high VRC in the nonsupportive context and children with low VRC in either context. Individual differences in VRC predict attenuated SNS stress reactivity in socially supportive conditions. Understanding how social support and VRC jointly mitigate SNS stress reactivity may further efforts to prevent negative health outcomes. Implications for biological sensitivity to context and differential susceptibility theories are discussed.