DEVIANT BEHAVIOR

2022, VOL. 43, NO. 12, 1558–1571

https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2021.2012729

(Dys)functional Cognitive-Behavioral Coping Strategies of Teachers

to Cope with Stress, Anxiety, and Depression
Farshad Ghasemi
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The prevalence of teacher stress, anxiety, and depression (SAD) has been Received 24 October 2021
confirmed and investigated in various contexts. This research aimed to study Accepted 25 November 2021
the (dys)functional coping strategies (CSs) of teachers and their experienced KEYWORDS
SAD levels. Of the 549 invited language teachers, 398 (75%) teachers with Coping mechanisms;
various occupational attributes participated in this study by completing the Cognitive-behavioral
(Dys)functional Coping Strategies Scales (DCSS) and the Depression, Anxiety, strategies; Language
and Stress Scales (DASS). The results indicated high teacher SAD rates (M = teachers; Stress; Anxiety;
31%). Regarding teacher professional characteristics, preservice teachers Depression
were more susceptible to suffer from stress, while expert teachers were at
risk of experiencing anxiety and depression. Among the recognized func­
tional CSs, talking with friends, parents, etc. and self-monitoring to control
feelings appear to be the two important protective cognitive-behavioral
(C-B) mechanisms to deal with teacher SAD. Using negative self-talk and self-
blame and smoking cigarettes (excessively) were the concerning coping
mechanisms of teachers with SAD. It is suggested that effective and contin­
uous interventions should be developed and incorporated into teacher
education programs to equip teachers with required CSs and to promote
functional C-B conducts and strategies.

Introduction
As a physically and mentally challenging profession, teaching demands a high emotional involvement,
which may cause stress, anxiety, and even depression in teachers (Mahan et al. 2010; Martínez-
Monteagudo et al. 2019; Richards 2012). Teacher stress has been defined as “the experience by
a teacher of unpleasant, negative emotions, such as anger, anxiety, tension, frustration or depression,
resulting from some aspect of their work as a teacher” (Kyriacou 2001: 28). There are several
recognized contributing factors to occupational stress and anxiety, including a heavy workload,
student misbehavior, unmotivated students, the lack of control over occupational decisions, and the
lack of support from colleagues and/or supervisors (Collie et al. 2012; Harmsen et al. 2018; Mahan
et al. 2010). Such factors are also evident in Karasek’s (1979) stress-management model of job strain,
which elaborated on the two core components of occupational stress, namely job demands and job
decision latitude. Accordingly, a heavy workload and the lack of decision-making authority are
conducive to mental strain and chronic stress. In a similar vein, Prilleltensky et al. (2016) conceptua­
lized stress as an imbalance between risk (e.g., isolation, student misbehavior, and disempowering
policies) and protective (e.g., social support, classroom management, and teacher’s voice) factors at the
personal, interpersonal, and organizational levels, which should be balanced by appropriate interven­
tions to prevent adverse consequences. As stress is a transactional and emotional process between

CONTACT Farshad Ghasemi ghasemi.f.k@gmail.com Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Urmia University, Urmia,
Iran
© 2022 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 1559

individuals and their context (Lazarus 1991), interventions may minimize teacher stress by enhancing
interpersonal interactions and environmental supports (Mahan et al. 2010; Prilleltensky et al. 2016).
For instance, celebrating achievements, promoting positive emotions, cultivating gratitude, and
facilitating meaningful relationships are some of the effective ways to enhance teacher well-being
(Seligman 2011).
The prolonged or chronic teacher stress may lead to certain critical psychological disorders,
including anxiety and depression (Mearns and Cain 2003; Melchior et al. 2007; Zhong et al. 2009),
which would result in teacher attrition (Harmsen et al. 2018). Anxiety is associated with feelings of
apprehension, worry, and tension, and it is referred to as teaching anxiety when experienced by
teachers in planning and conducting classroom activities(Gardner and Leak 1994). Melchior et al.
(2007), examining the effect of work stress on depression and anxiety, concluded that “work stress
appears to precipitate diagnosable depression and anxiety in previously healthy young workers”
(p. 1119), which was the result of exposure to high psychological job demands, namely lack of social
support, extreme time pressure, and an excessive workload. According to Machida (2011), the
primary reason for anxiety among language teachers was the lack of training, experience, and
confidence in teaching English. As workplace conditions and major organizational changes may
be out of teachers’ control, the research literature suggests providing career counseling and educa­
tion, increasing social support, improving working conditions, and enhancing teacher–student
relationship quality as the effective strategies to alleviate teacher anxiety (Ghasemi 2021a, 2021b;
Harmsen et al. 2018; MacIntyre et al. 2020; Mearns and Cain 2003). It is surmised that teachers
facing misbehaving students, unfriendly colleagues and administrators, and an excessive workload
would experience low job satisfaction, dysfunctional behaviors, and/or impaired occupational
functioning, making them stressed, anxious, and depressed (Harmsen et al. 2018; MacIntyre et al.
2020; Mahan et al. 2010). Thus, it appears that there are significant associations between depression,
teacher competence, and the working environment. In other words, competent teachers with
positive perceptions of working conditions are more capable of dealing with classroom stressors
(e.g., students’ challenging behaviors) “because they may have more knowledge and resources to
support their competence and motivation on the job and strategies to deal with work-related
stressors” (Jeon et al. 2017: 2). Therefore, teachers with different professional (Jeon et al. 2017)
and psychological (Martínez-Monteagudo et al. 2019) backgrounds react to stress, anxiety, and
depression (SAD) differently by adopting various (dys)functional behaviors and strategies
(Harmsen et al. 2018; Prilleltensky et al. 2016).
According to Mearns and Cain (2003), teachers are different in coping with occupational SAD,
which affects their cognitive and behavioral outcomes. By coping, we mean “cognitive and beha­
vioral efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing”
(Lazarus and Folkman 1984: 141). According to Pithers (1995), the adverse consequences of work-
related stressors could be alleviated by the extent and strength of teachers’ coping resources. While
some teachers may respond to occupational stressors effectively (e.g., accepting responsibility,
seeking social support, and exercise), others may develop dysfunctional cognitive and behavioral
strategies (e.g., escape avoidance, throwing something, and uncontrolled aggression) (Arikewuyo
2004; Austin et al. 2005). In a study with preservice teachers, Paquette and Rieg (2016) found that
teachers mostly use social relationships and support, exercising, and time management as the
functional coping mechanism with professional stress and anxiety. In a similar vein, Skaalvik and
Skaalvik (2015) investigated (dys)functional coping strategies (CSs) of teachers with occupational
stress and anxiety, resulting in the prevalence of working hard and exercising strategies in young
teachers; sick leave as a protective strategy in middle-aged teachers; and relaxing, sleeping, and sick
leave strategies in senior teachers. Teaching experience also appears to be a significant predictor of
teachers’ (dys)functional CSs (Arikewuyo 2004). For instance, Carton and Fruchart (2014), studying
coping mechanisms of teachers with stressful circumstances across teaching experience, found that,
while novice teachers successfully utilized functional strategies such as social support, experienced
teachers responded dysfunctionally by demonstrating less self-control through using confrontation
1560 F. GHASEMI

and\or avoidance strategies. We also have evidence of teachers’ use of (dys)functional cognitive
(e.g., problem appraisal (functional) and perceiving one’s helplessness (dysfunctional)) and
behavioral (e.g., self-organization (functional) and watching a movie (dysfunctional)) CSs,
which contributes to alleviating occupational stress. For instance, Arikewuyo (2004) reported
frequent use of (dys)functional behavioral strategies rather than cognitive ones among secondary
school teachers.
Based on the abovementioned literature, the positive effects of the functional CSs (behavioral
or cognitive) on managing stress, anxiety, and depression have been partly confirmed. According
to the findings of MacIntyre et al. (2020), while functional CSs (approach coping) were signifi­
cantly correlated with the positive psychological outcomes, such as resilience, well-being, health,
and happiness, dysfunctional CSs (avoidant coping) consistently correlated with the adverse
outcomes, such as stress, anxiety, depression, and feelings of loneliness. Thus, we hypothesize
that dysfunctional CSs will be positively associated with SAD, and functional CSs will be
negatively associated with SAD. As most of the interventions in teacher education programs to
cope with emotional and psychological disorders are based on the research on their causes and
sources (Ghasemi 2021a: 2021b), more research on teachers’ CSs is needed to develop effective
intervention programs at the cognitive and behavioral level (Capone et al. 2019; Jeon et al. 2017;
Prilleltensky et al. 2016; Richards 2012).
This study was prompted by a concern for the emotional and behavioral health of teachers
experiencing work-related SAD, which could adversely affect their well-being if accompanied by
dysfunctional CSs. It appears that identifying various teachers’ (dys)functional CSs may help
administrators and counselors recognize behavioral signals and risk factors associated with
teachers’ psychological well-being. As discussed later, teachers with different occupational attri­
butes may experience various SAD levels in their professional careers, thus influencing their CSs
usage (see Austin et al. 2005; Carton and Fruchart 2014). This study draws on the concepts and
theories of Lazarus and Folkman (1984), Carver et al. (1989), and Carver (1997), who regarded
CSs as functional and dysfunctional based on their functionality. The functionality of the coping
strategies refers to the extent to which whether one’s behaviors or thoughts reduce the possibility
of experiencing emotional disorders (i.e., functional) or increase it (i.e., dysfunctional). It appears
that there is ample evidence on the prevalence (Kyriacou 2001; Richards 2012), sources,
manifestations (Harmsen et al. 2018; Jeon et al. 2017; Mearns and Cain 2003; Paquette and
Rieg 2016; Richards 2012), and adverse consequences (Melchior et al. 2007; Zhong et al. 2009) of
teacher SAD. Additionally, the relationships of teacher stress and depression with burnout
(Ghasemi 2021a: 2021b; Capone et al. 2019), emotional intelligence (Martínez-Monteagudo
et al. 2019), and working conditions and social support (Mahan et al. 2010; Skaalvik and
Skaalvik 2015) have already been studied. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study
has explored teachers’ use of (dys)functional cognitive-behavioral) CSs to cope with SAD in their
teaching career. Although there have been a few studies investigating teachers’ CSs in managing
their stress (e.g., Arikewuyo 2004; Austin et al. 2005; Harmsen et al. 2018; Paquette and Rieg
2016; Richards 2012), no study has researched teachers coping mechanisms based on
C-B framework across teaching experience.
Particularly, language teachers’ experienced SAD and coping mechanisms appear to be
a growing concern that demands further investigations. Recent studies attest that language teachers
may face “challenges resulting from the specificity and the emotional character of foreign-language
teaching: self-doubts about one’s own language ability; coping with the emotional anxieties of
learners; threats to the sense of self and identity; energy-intense teaching methodologies; inter­
cultural components to teaching; and precarious working conditions . . . [which may be exacer­
bated when] combined with the litany of new unique stressors emerging from the global pandemic
and the reaction of education systems to it” (MacIntyre et al. 2020: 3). Accordingly, we focused on
the relationship of SAD among foreign language teachers in different stages of teaching experience
with a variety of possible (dys)functional C-B CSs. In other words, how (dys)functional C-B CSs
 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 1561

may alleviate or increase the probability of experiencing SAD in language teachers was thoroughly
explored. More specifically, the current study (a) addresses the questions regarding the rates of
teachers’ experienced SAD in reference to their teaching experience and (b) explore their use of
(dys)functional C-B CSs in their teaching career.

Methods
We applied a cross-sectional study design to investigate foreign language teachers’ well-being working
in private language schools in Tehran, Iran.

Participants and context

The education system in Iran is centralized and divided into K-12 educations with primary and
secondary schools. Besides public schools, parallel private schools with a similar educational system
and higher academic qualities are also available. Regarding foreign language learning, there are
privately run English training centers as well, where classes are usually geared towards
communicative competence in a foreign language. As English language learning formally begins
in secondary school, parents enroll their children before this period, usually at the 6–11 age range,
to prepare them for their future academic pursuits. In other words, language learning in such
schools typically supplements formal education or existing knowledge of a foreign language. These
private language schools charge tuition fees, and supervisors regularly observe teachers’ perfor­
mance in order to ensure high-quality teaching and learning. Lack of teaching efficiency, crowded
classes, and demotivated teachers with low salaries and/or job satisfaction are some of the main
reasons that encourage students to attend private language schools to learn the English language
communicatively (Ghasemi 2021c). Unlike state schools, where teachers are employed by the
Ministry of Education to get tenure, language teachers in private schools are contract teachers
who have to work hard to satisfy and motivate their students, which may give rise to extra pressure,
stress, and/or anxiety. These teachers may also suffer from teacher burnout (Ghasemi 2021b),
which mediates the relationship between job stress and depression in teachers (Zhong et al. 2009).
For these reasons, the participants in this study were contract teachers teaching the English
language in private language schools in Tehran, Iran.
A total of 549 language teachers from 23 private language schools were invited to participate
in this study during the summer semester. Of the 549 teachers, 398 (75%) teachers participated
in this study. We used multistage (cluster) sampling by first constructing a sampling frame for
each stage. A number was assigned to each city of the Tehran province (i.e., 16 cities), and a
randomly generated number (i.e., Tehran) was selected, representing the first stage units.
Similarly, we randomly selected sample districts after assigning a number to each district (i.e.,
22 districts) of Tehran, as the units of the second stage. Finally, private language schools of the
selected districts (i.e., 38 schools) were randomly selected to be studied by inviting the language
teachers working in those schools after calculating the required sample size, with a margin of
error of ±5% atthe 95% confidence level. For comprehensive information on different SAD rates
and CSs, it was important to survey teachers with different occupational attributes (i.e., profes­
sional characteristics). Participating teachers were categorized based on their expertise (novice:
≤3 years; experienced: >3 years), guided by the research literature on teaching expertise (Graham
et al. 2020; Klassen and Chiu 2010). We also included preservice teachers who were attending
teacher education programs in the private schools to get certified as a teacher, which takes
almost three to four months. Table 1 demonstrates the demographics for each subgroup of the
teachers.
1562 F. GHASEMI

Table 1. Characteristics of the Study Sample.

Preservice teachers Novice teachers Experienced teachers Total sample
N/n 153 (38%) 131 (32%) 114 (28%) 398 (100%)
Age
Mean (SD) 20 (4.5) 24.83 (3.9) 32.54 (6.1) 26 (6.7)
[Min-Max] [18–23] [21–26] [26–39] [18–39]
Gender
Male 68 (44%) 59 (45%) 53 (46%) 180 (45%)
Female 85 (55%) 72 (54%) 61 (53%) 218 (54%)
Education
Undergraduate student 121 (79%) 43 (32%) 2 (01%) 166 (41%)
BA 32 (20%) 81 (61%) 76 (66%) 189 (47%)
MA - 7 (05%) 36 (31%) 43 (10%)

Measures
Depression anxiety stress scales (DASS)
We used the DASS (Lovibond and Lovibond 1995) to assess teachers’ stress, anxiety, and depression. It
uses 42 items to assess three subscales of stress, anxiety, and depression (14 items for each subscale) on
a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (did not apply to me at all) to 3 (applied to me very much, or most
of the time). The Stress subscale considers agitation, impatience, and difficulty in being relaxed (e.g., “I
found myself getting agitated”). The Anxiety subscale assesses aspects connected with subjective
anxiety experiences and psychophysiological activation (e.g., “I felt I was close to panic”). Finally,
aspects such as hopelessness, devaluation of life, sadness, and lack of interest are evaluated in the
Depression subscale (e.g., “I felt that life was meaningless”). Summing the items gives the total score,
which ranges from 0 to 42. Scores indicative of severe levels for the Stress, Anxiety, and Depression
subscales are >25, >14, and >20, respectively (Lovibond and Lovibond 1995). The scale has indicated
high internal consistency and reliability and good convergent and discriminant validity (Crawford and
Henry 2003). The computed Cronbach’s alphas for the Stress, Anxiety, and Depression subscales were
.74, .81, and .76, respectively.

(Dys)functional coping strategies scales (DCSS)

We developed the DCSS by categorizing CSs into functional and dysfunctional strategies based
on their functionality (Carver, Scheier, and Weintraub 1989). More specifically, the DCSS was
developed based on qualitative studies in the literature. These studies were associated with the
assessment of written reflections by teachers on the possible stressors and resilience factors
during teaching practices as well as the existing qualitative studies and literature reviews (e.g.,
Austin, Shah, and Muncer 2005; Kyriacou 2001; McCormick 1997; Paquette and Rieg 2016;
Prilleltensky, Neff, and Bessell 2016; Richards 2012). First, possible C-B CSs were categorized
into (dys)functional CSs that either decrease or increase the probability of being affected by SAD
symptoms. These categorizations of CSs have been designed in a C-B manner to facilitate the
development of intervention programs to improve the current established resilient C-B strategies.
Then, items were developed to recognize and evaluate potential (dys)functional CSs. We piloted
the DCSS by administrating it to 147 English language teachers (i.e., a subsample of the study)
followed by the factor and reliability analyses, which resulted in modifying or omitting poten­
tially problematic items. The final measure consisted of 20 (dys)functional CSs, which asked
teachers how they generally act when they feel stressed or depressed. Using a two-tailed design,
the teachers rated the presented coping strategy as yes (I use this coping strategy) or no (I do not
use this coping strategy). Subsequently, they rated the utilized CSs based on their perceived
effectiveness in preventing SAD on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (not at all satisfied) to
 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 1563

Figure 1. The Association Between (Dys)functional C-B CSs and Teacher Stress, Anxiety, and Depression.

4 (completely satisfied). The teachers were also provided with the opportunity to specify further
CSs they had used. A detailed list of the analyzed (dys)functional CSs has been demonstrated in
Figure 1. We conducted exploratory factor analysis that resulted in a two-factor solution of the
(dys)functional CSs in the study sample, which explained 83% of the variance in scores with high
loadings on the factors (0.72–0.91). The Cronbach’s alpha reliability values of the subscales in
the current study were .80 for the functional and .77 for the dysfunctional CSs.

Procedures
After obtaining the required ethical approval, the researcher met schools’ administrators to get their
permission to invite teachers to participate in the study. We explained the study to the interested
teachers (N = 549) and distributed the written consent form containing the required information
about the study. The teachers returned 398 consent forms indicating their interest in participating in
the study. These preservice, novice, and experienced teachers were briefed about their rights, privacy,
data confidentiality, and ethical approval. Then, they were invited to participate in the predefined
sessions (arranged by the administrators) in their workplace at the end of their classes to complete the
surveys. The participation was voluntary, and the teachers were free to deny attending or completing
the surveys at any time of the study. The data collection procedure lasted almost a month and was
conducted by the collaboration of the administrators in 2019. The results of the study were shared with
the participants in the end, as promised.
1564 F. GHASEMI

Statistical analyses
We analyzed data using IBM SPSS version 23. Group differences for all three subscales, Stress, Anxiety,
and Depression, were examined for all subgroups. Nonparametric tests, such as the Kruskal–Wallis
test and the Man–Whitney U test, were used because of the psychometric nature of the survey data in
this study. Additionally, due to some extreme values in the data, we decided to utilize nonparametric
statistics, which are generally more robust and not often seriously affected by outliers in data. We
performed chi-square tests to analyze hypothesized CSs, which were reported as odds ratios (ORs)
with the corresponding p-values and confidence limits. Therefore, the sample was divided into
“stressed” and “not stressed” teachers with high values for the stress (≥25) or anxiety (≥14) subscales.
We hypothesized that dysfunctional CSs should be positively associated with SAD as opposed to
functional CSs, which should be negatively associated with SAD. The ORs are to be interpreted as
meaning that using a functional coping strategy is associated with the probability of not experiencing
SAD, and using a dysfunctional coping strategy is associated with the probability of experiencing SAD.
We applied forest plots to show the results of the CSs using the R package. Besides ORs, we conducted
an explorative binary logistic regression to test the potential effects of the respective CSs on teacher
SAD, using a stepwise forward selection (α = .05). We analyzed the CSs (dummy coded as 0 = not use;
1 = use) as potential multivariable determinants of teacher SAD (dummy coded as 0 = stressed; 1 = not
stressed).

Results
The results of group differences for the experience of SAD with the three dimensions of Stress,
Anxiety, and Depression are presented in Table 2. The experienced teachers indicated lower scores
in the Stress dimension than preservice and novice teachers. However, the results for the Anxiety
dimension were different for the experienced teachers who demonstrated higher levels of anxiety than
novice and preservice teachers. A similar pattern of experience was evident for the Depression
dimension, in which experienced teachers appear to suffer from depression more than the other
teachers. The results of Kruskal–Wallis were significant for all subscales of the DASS: Stress (χ2 (2) =
11.96, p < .05, φ ¼ :17), Anxiety (χ2 (2) = 31.81, p < .01, φ ¼ :28), and Depression (χ2 (2) = 10.91, p <
.05, φ ¼ :16). However, the results for the variable “DASS” were not significant, χ2 (2) = 1.82, p > .05,
with a prevalence rate of 29%.
We also computed the ORs, which resulted in five (dys)functional CSs across teacher groups
(Table 3). The utilized functional strategies such as talking with friends, parents, etc. (OR = 3.76,
95% CI [1.79–7.89], p < .01), trying exercise and/or walking (OR = 2.75, 95% CI [1.37–5.53], p < .01),

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics for Subscales of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS).
Subscale Preservice Novice Experienced Total sample p4
Stress
Meansum (SD) 23.96 (4.86) 22.34 (6.86) 20.13 (4.59) 22.17 (5.42) < .01**
Meanscale (SD) 3.96 (.862) 3.71 (1.12) 3.29 (.903) 3.47 (1.07) < .01**
Highstress1 n,% 68, 44% 53, 40% 24, 21% 154, 21% < .01**
Anxiety
Meansum (SD) 7.32 (3.86) 8.62 (4.03) 12.42 (4.91) 10.57 (4.24) < .01**
Meanscale (SD) 1.89 (.814) 2.14 (1.25) 2.76 (1.14) 2.36 (1.73) < .01**
Highanxiety2 n,% 21, 13% 27, 20% 39, 34% 91, 24% < .01**
Depression
Meansum (SD) 12.53 (3.96) 13.37 (4.21) 16.18 (5.34) 14.05 (4.24) < .01**
Meanscale (SD) 2.65 (1.23) 2.76 (1.09) 3.26 (1.54) 2.81 (1.15) < .01**
Highdepression3 n,% 8, 5% 14, 10% 23, 20% 53, 14% < .01**
SAD
n,% 53, 34% 46, 35% 26, 22% 134, 29% > .05
Note. 1high values for stress (≥25); 2high values for anxiety (≥14); 3high values for depression (≥20); 4calculated p for differences in
subscales/groups with Kruskal-Wallis. Meansum: the sum of the individual item scores; Meanscale: the mean of item scores.
 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 1565

Table 3. The Prominence of the Utilized (Dys)functional Coping Strategies in the Current Study.
SAD
Yes No Total
Functional Coping Strategies n % n % χ2 p OR (95% CI) n, %
Talking with friends, parents, etc. 116 31.7 249 68.2 13.60 <.01** 3.76 (1.79–7.89) 365, 91.7
Not utilized 21 63.6 12 36.3
Trying exercise and/or walking 122 33.7 240 66.2 8.62 <.01** 2.75 (1.37–5.53) 362, 90.9
Not utilized 21 58.3 15 41.6
Self-monitoring to control feelings 101 28.9 248 71.0 8.01 <.01** 2.36 (1.29–4.32) 349, 87.7
Not utilized 24 48.9 25 51.0
Enjoying a movie or doing a hobby 112 31.6 242 68.3 4.55 <.05* 1.97 (1.05–3.71) 354, 88.9
Not utilized 21 47.7 23 52.2
Self-motivation to solve the issue 95 31.5 206 68.4 5.28 <.05* 1.73 (1.08–2.76) 301, 75.6
Not utilized 43 44.3 54 55.7
Dysfunctional Coping Strategies
Negative self-talk and self-blame 31 59.6 21 40.4 21.61 <.01** 3.90 (2.14–7.12) 52, 13.1
Not utilized 95 27.4 251 72.5
Unhealthy eating and drinking 18 58.1 13 41.9 11.08 <.01** 3.36 (1.59–7.11) 31, 7.8
Not utilized 107 29.2 260 70.8
Smoking cigarettes (excessively) 31 51.6 29 48.3 9.01 <.01** 2.31 (1.32–4.02) 60, 15.1
Not utilized 107 31.6 231 68.3
Wasting time by exploring the internet 82 42.7 110 57.3 10.57 <.01** 2.01 (1.31–3.04) 192, 48.2
Not utilized 56 27.2 150 72.8
Developing negative cognitions 61 39.6 93 60.4 7.84 <.01** 1.84 (1.20–2.84) 154, 38.7
Not utilized 64 26.2 180 73.8

self-monitoring to control feelings (OR = 2.36, 95% CI [1.29–4.32], p < .01), enjoying a movie or doing
a hobby (OR = 1.97, 95% CI [1.05–3.71], p < .05), and self-motivation to solve the issue (OR = 1.73, 95%
CI [1.08–2.76], p < .05) were negatively related to SAD and were effective in alleviating the experience
of teacher SAD. However, dysfunctional strategies, including negative self-talk and self-blame (OR =
3.90, 95% CI [2.14–7.12], p < .01), unhealthy eating and drinking (OR = 3.36, 95% CI [1.59–7.11], p <
.01), smoking cigarettes (excessively) (OR = 2.31, 95% CI [1.32–4.02], p <.01), wasting time by exploring
the internet (OR = 2.01, 95% CI [1.31–3.04], p < .01), and developing negative cognitions (OR = 1.84,
95% CI [1.20–2.84], p < .01) were positively related to SAD and increased its symptoms. The results of
a forest plot give a better view of (dys)functional CSs comparison (Figure 2).
We also analyzed the potential intercorrelations of CSs (Table 4). The results indicated that talking
with friends, parents, etc. was positively correlated with self-monitoring to control feelings (r = .124, p <
.01) and self-motivation to solve the issue (r = .181, p < .01). Additionally, we found that trying exercise
and/or walking was negatively connected with smoking cigarettes (r = – .131, p < .01) and wasting time
by exploring the internet (r = – .106, p < .01). The functional coping strategy self-monitoring to control
feelings was negatively related to the dysfunctional strategies negative self-talk and self-blame (r = –
.116, p < .01) and developing negative cognitions (r = – .154, p < .01). In a similar vein, the functional
coping strategy self-motivation to solve the issue was negatively related to dysfunctional coping strategy
negative self-talk and self-blame (r = – .134, p < .01). There were positive relationships between
dysfunctional CSs negative self-talk and self-blame and smoking cigarettes (r = .110, p < .01) and
developing negative cognitions (r = .304, p < .01). Likewise, the results indicated a positive correlation
between unhealthy eating and drinking and smoking cigarettes (r = .105, p < .01).
Additionally, we conducted binary logistic regression analysis to confirm the significant associa­
tions of the (dys)functional strategies with SAD. In the presented results, the logarithmized logit
coefficients as ORs are signified by exp(B). While values less than one represent a negative influence on
the dependent variable, values more than one represent the positive influence of the independent
variables on the dependent variable (SAD). The results confirmed the significant negative relationship
of talking with friends, parents, etc. (exp(B) = 0.265, p < .01), trying exercise and/or walking (exp(B) =
0.361, p < .01), and self-monitoring to control feelings (exp(B) = 0.521, p = .051) with SAD. Conversely,
 1566

Table 4. The Results of (Dys)functional Coping Strategies Correlation Using Kendall Tau.
F. GHASEMI

Functional Coping Strategies Dysfunctional Coping Strategies

1. Talking with 2. Trying 3. Self- 4. Enjoying 5. Self- 1. Negative 2. Unhealthy 4. Wasting time by 5. Developing
friends, exercise and/ monitoring to a movie or doing motivation to self-talk and eating and 3. Smoking exploring the negative
parents, etc. or walking control feelings a hobby solve the issue self-blame drinking cigarettes internet cognitions
1. Talking with r = .073 r = .124** r = .078 r = .181** r = – .096 r = – .061 r = – .053 r = – .068 r = – .069
friends, parents, p > .05 p < .01 p > .05 p < .01 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05
etc.
2. Trying exercise r = .051 r = .088 r = .068 r = – .053 r = – .041 r = –.131** r = – .106** r = – .071
and/or walking p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p < .01 p < .01 p > .05
3. Self-monitoring r = .039 r = .107** r = – .116** r = – .054 r = – .052 r = – .037 r = – .154**
to control p > .05 p < .01 p < .01 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p < .01
feelings
4. Enjoying r = .068 r = – .043 r = – .068 r = – .078 r = – .077 r = – .032
a movie or p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05
doing a hobby
5. Self-motivation r = – .134** r = – .037 r = – .057 r = – .061 r = – .068
to solve the p < .01 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05 p > .05
issue
1. Negative self- r = .079 r = .110** r = .068 r = .304**
talk and self- p > .05 p < .01 p > .05 p < .01
blame
2. Unhealthy r = .105** r = .053 r = .029
eating and p < .01 p > .05 p > .05
drinking
3. Smoking r = .066 r = .039
cigarettes p > .05 p > .05
4. Wasting time by r = .051
exploring the p > .05
internet
Note. n.s. = not significant
 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 1567

Figure 2. The Forest Plot Figures of the (Dys)functional Coping Strategies with Related ORs.

we found positive relationships between negative self-talk and self-blame (exp(B) = 2.031, p < .01),
smoking cigarettes (exp(B) = 1.681, p < .01), and developing negative cognitions (exp(B) = 2.103, p < .01)
with SAD. According to the results, there were significant marginal relationships between (dys)
functional coping strategy enjoying a movie or doing a hobby (exp(B) = 0.581, p = .056), unhealthy
eating and drinking (exp(B) = 1.826, p = .062), and wasting time by exploring the internet (exp(B) =
1.429, p = .059) with SAD. Finally, the regression model demonstrated a weak influence of the
functional coping strategy self-motivation to solve the issue on SAD (exp(B) = .821, p = .091).

Discussion and implications

Based on our literature search, this is the first research work exploring different (dys)functional
C-B CSs used by teachers, which influence their level of experienced SAD. According to the study
results, the prevalence of experienced SAD was different for teachers with various professional
expertise. The rates of experienced stress were more concerning for preservice teachers, which reduced
slightly by obtaining teaching experience. However, in the case of anxiety and depression, experienced
1568 F. GHASEMI

teachers appear to suffer more from these disorders than preservice teachers. In other words, as
teachers gain more experience in teaching and face challenges and problems, the levels of anxiety and
depression may also increase gradually over time. Our results regarding the experience of stress are in
accord with earlier research (Herman et al. 2020; Leung et al. 2009; Richards 2012), which demon­
strates the importance of developing positive CSs (Prilleltensky et al. 2016; Ghasemi, 2021a2021b) for
novice teachers to reduce turnover intentions (Harmsen et al. 2018). For instance, colleagues and
supervisors can effectively support and empower preservice teachers by instructing them to set
realistic expectations and goals and providing them with motivating and constructive feedback in
order to alleviate their occupational stress (Ghasemi 2021b). The prevalence of teacher stress in the
preservice and novice teachers could be attributed to their lack of developed effective CSs, which may
cause stress in dealing with and managing their emotions (Caspersen and Raaen 2014; Skaalvik and
Skaalvik 2015). According to Paquette and Rieg (2016), preservice teachers may experience elevated
levels of stress for the various perceived occupational stressors, including time management, overall
teaching workload, class management and enforcing discipline, supervisor observation, and the lack of
experience to teach students with emotional/behavioral problems. There are similar reports regarding
the experience of depression (Jurado et al. 1998), indicating an increase in the rates of depression
among teachers with more teaching experience than preservice or novice teachers. Similarly, our
results regarding the increasing rate of anxiety with teaching experience are in line with research
literature (Gardner and Leak 1994; Machida 2011). According to Gresham (2018), in-service teachers
with more than five years of teaching experience could still suffer from anxiety, which indicates an
enduring state of anxiety after the initial years of teaching experience. Additionally, there appears to be
a significant correlation between teaching experience and the use of coping mechanisms (Arikewuyo
2004; Carton and Fruchart 2014; Skaalvik and Skaalvik 2015). Therefore, preservice teachers should be
guided in teacher education programs to develop functional C-B CSs to deal with SAD effectively, and
continuous professional support for in-service and experienced teachers are required to reduce the
probability of experiencing anxiety and depression (Ghasemi, 2021b; Gresham 2018; Harmsen et al.
2018; Jeon et al. 2017; MacIntyre et al. 2020; Prilleltensky et al. 2016).
Regarding the importance of the identified CSs in this study, we found that certain C-B strategies,
such as talking with friends, trying exercise and/or walking, and self-monitoring to control feelings, were
more prevalent and utilized in alleviating SAD than other CSs. However, MacIntyre et al. (2020),
studying CSs of 600 language teachers, found that “acceptance, followed by advanced planning, re-
framing, actively doing something about the situation, and using work or other activity as
a distraction” (p. 7) were the most frequently used CSs by these teachers. Although the results of
the current study and the study by MacIntyre et al. (2020) indicate that teachers utilize both cognitive
and behavioral strategies to manage their stress and anxiety, Arikewuyo (2004) found that teachers
never use active cognitive strategies when experiencing occupational stress. Therefore, it is suggested
that, besides actions on the part of administrators and teacher trainers, teachers should also attempt to
“improve and practice effective CSs proven helpful by [other] teachers who have shared their
successful approaches” (Richards 2012: 308). As there was moderate intercorrelation between CSs
talking with friends, self-monitoring, and self-motivation, teachers may use these strategies alternatively
with similar positive consequences. Also, the binary logistic regression results indicated the significant
impact of these CSs on SAD. Similar C-B CSs (e.g., social support, self-controlling, and planned
problem-solving) have been investigated to be the major effective functional strategies utilized by
teachers when experiencing SAD (Arikewuyo 2004; Austin et al. 2005; MacIntyre et al. 2020; Mahan
et al. 2010). Therefore, it is reasonable to state that “applying cognitive-behavior skills is a good
approach to eliminating negative coping responses and replacing them with positive strategies”
(Austin et al. 2005: 76). According to Leung et al. (2009), teachers who use C-B stress management
CSs demonstrate less physical and emotional symptoms of occupational stress and enjoy higher job
satisfaction. These researchers recommended programs based on C-B coping mechanisms as the
effective techniques to enhance teachers coping resources to deal with SAD. The use of functional
cognitive CSs (i.e., self-monitoring to control feelings and self-motivation to solve the issue) were to some
 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 1569

extent less frequent than behavioral strategies (χ2 (2) = 5.28); which may be attributed to teachers’ lack
of familiarity with these techniques (see Arikewuyo 2004; Ghasemi 2021a). Thus teachers should be
instructed to use effective cognitive strategies to monitor and restructure their dysfunctional cognition
to control and alleviate work-related stress (Ghasemi 2021b; Gardner et al. 2005).
The use of dysfunctional CSs, negative self-talk and self-blame, unhealthy eating and drinking,
smoking cigarettes (excessively), wasting time by exploring the internet, and developing negative cogni­
tions by the participants could be problematic in the long run. Based on the results, these dysfunctional
CSs are positively correlated with teacher SAD and increase the probability of suffering from SAD in
teachers. Regarding the frequency of using these strategies, almost 48% of the teachers reported
wasting time on the internet, and 15% stated smoking cigarettes as their behavioral response to
SAD. They also developed negative cognitions (39%) and negative self-blame (13%) as the cognitive
consequences of SAD. Among the language teachers studied by MacIntyre et al. (2020), behavioral
disengagement, denial, self-blaming, and substance abuse were the utilized dysfunctional C-B CSs.
These findings suggest that any intervention should address both cognitive and behavioral dysfunc­
tional consequences of teacher SAD (Leung et al. 2009; Prilleltensky et al. 2016).
Regarding the results of the intercorrelations of dysfunctional CSs, there were positive associations
between negative self-talk and self-blame, developing negative cognitions, and smoking cigarettes.
Therefore, negative self-talking may increase the probability of developing negative cognitions as
well as smoking habits when experiencing SAD. Also, the results of the logical regression confirmed
the significant influence of these CSs on teacher SAD. As talking with friends has a protective influence
on SAD, it may also decrease negative self-talk and accompanying dysfunctional CSs (e.g., smoking).
This finding is also supported in the literature on teacher CSs (e.g., Austin et al. 2005; Ghasemi 2021d;
Mearns and Cain 2003), which states that the use of functional CSs could reduce the probability of
utilizing negatively associated dysfunctional CSs. In short, recognizing the association of these
variables (CSs, SAD, and teacher professional characteristics) could contribute to organizing and
conducting preventive intervention programs for teachers with potential risk factors to experience
SAD in their teaching career.
In conclusion, this study was an attempt to explore the relationships of (dys)functional CSs with
experienced SAD in teachers. The results indicated the prevalence and association of different (dys)
functional CSs with teacher SAD. Furthermore, the current research was successful in identifying
clinically related SAD incidence rates in the studied groups of teachers with different occupational
attributes. We also analyzed the relationship and potential influence of (dys)functional CSs on SAD in
teachers. However, this study was limited by its cross-sectional design, limiting the sufficient inter­
pretation of the causal relationships between the CSs and SAD. Therefore, we used different statistical
methods to suggest these causal relationships in an explorative way by assuming an associative
connection between CSs and SAD and interpreting the influences of CSs accordingly.
A longitudinal research study is required to explore these causal associations. As using self-
assessment measures increases the probability of achieving distorted results, using a mixed-method
design with detailed accounts of individuals’ experiences could present comprehensive and sound
results.

Acknowledgement
I would like to express my sincere thanks to the teachers who participated in the present study. I also would like to thank
Dr. Ghasemi for his support and assistance in data collection and analysis.

Ethics approval
We further confirm that any aspect of the work covered in this manuscript that has involved human patients has been
conducted with the ethical approval of all relevant bodies and that such approvals are acknowledged within the
manuscript.
1570 F. GHASEMI

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of
the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or
comparable ethical standards.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Funding
No funding was received for this work.

Notes on contributor
Farshad Ghasemi, PhD, is a Researcher in the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at Urmia University, Iran. His
work spans random clinical trials, survey research, and qualitative inquiries to uncover mechanisms underlying poor
outcomes and to translate these findings into evidence-based interventions. In particular, he is interested in tailoring
therapeutic approaches to prevent and treat specific mental disorders.

ORCID
Farshad Ghasemi http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3542-6736

References
Arikewuyo, M. O. 2004. “Stress Management Strategies of Secondary School Teachers in Nigeria.” Educational Research
46 (2): 195–207. doi:10.1080/0013188042000222467.
Austin, V., S. Shah, and S. Muncer. 2005. “Teacher Stress and Coping Strategies Used to Reduce Stress.” Occupational
Therapy International 12 (2): 63–80. doi:10.1002/oti.16.
Capone, V., M. Joshanloo, and M. S. A. Park. 2019. “Burnout, Depression, Efficacy Beliefs, and Work-related Variables
among School Teachers.” International Journal of Educational Research 95: 97–108. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2019.02.001.
Carton, A. and E. Fruchart. 2014. “Sources of Stress, Coping Strategies, Emotional Experience: Effects of the Level of
Experience in Primary School Teachers in France.” Educational Review 66 (2): 245–62. doi:10.1080/
00131911.2013.769937.
Carver, C. S., M. F. Scheier, and J. K. Weintraub. 1989. “Assessing Coping Strategies: A Theoretically Based Approach.”
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56 (2): 267–83. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.56.2.267.
Carver, C. S. 1997. “You Want to Measure Coping but Your Protocol’s Too Long: Consider the Brief Cope.”
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 4 (1): 92–100. doi:10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6.
Caspersen, J. and F. D. Raaen. 2014. “Novice Teachers and How They Cope.” Teachers and Teaching 20 (2): 189–211.
doi:10.1080/13540602.2013.848570.
Collie, R. J., J. D. Shapka, and N. E. Perry. 2012. “School Climate and Social-emotional Learning: Predicting Teacher Stress,
Job Satisfaction, and Teaching Efficacy.” Journal of Educational Psychology 104 (4): 1189–204. doi:10.1037/a0029356.
Crawford, J. and J. Henry. 2003. “The Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS): Normative Data and Latent Structure in
a Large Non-clinical Sample.” British Journal of Clinical Psychology 42: 111–31. doi:10.1348/014466503321903544.
Gardner, B., J. Rose, O. Mason, P. Tyler, and D. Cushway, et al. 2005. “Cognitive Therapy and Behavioral Coping in the
Management of Work-related Stress: An Intervention Study.” Work and Stress 19 (2): 137–52. doi:10.1080/
02678370500157346.
Gardner, L. and G. Leak. 1994. “Characteristics and Correlates of Teaching Anxiety among College Psychology
Teachers.” Teaching of Psychology 21 (1): 28–32. doi:10.1207/s15328023top2101_5.
Ghasemi F. (2021d). Exploring Middle School Teachers’ Perceptions of Factors Affecting the Teacher–student Relationships.
Educational Research for Policy and Practice Advance online publication , 10.1007/s10671-021-09300-1
Ghasemi, F . 2021a. “EFL Teachers’ Burnout and Individual Psychology: The Effect of an Empowering Program and
Cognitive Restructuring Techniques.“ Current Psychology. Advance online publication doi:10.1007/s12144-021-01368-5.
Ghasemi, F . 2021b. “An Adlerian-Based Empowering Intervention Program with Burned-Out Teachers.“ Journal of
Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0022057421998331.
Ghasemi, F . 2021c. Revisiting the Effects of Hypnotic Suggestion on Reading Comprehension: The Role of Emotional
Intelligence and Hypnotic Suggestibility. Current Psychology Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s12144-021-02422-y.
 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR 1571

Graham, L. J., S. L.J White, K. Cologon, and R. C. Pianta, et al. 2020. “Do Teachers’ Years of Experience Make
a Difference in the Quality of Teaching?” Teaching and Teacher Education 96: 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2020.103190.
Gresham, G. 2018. “Pre-service to In-service: Does Mathematics Anxiety Change with Teaching Experience?” Journal of
Teacher Education 69 (1): 90–107. doi:10.1177/0022487117702580.
Harmsen, R., M. Helms-Lorenz, R. Maulana, and K. van Veen, et al. 2018. “The Relationship between Beginning
Teachers’ Stress Causes, Stress Responses, Teaching Behavior and Attrition.” Teachers and Teaching 24 (6): pp.
626–43. doi:10.1080/13540602.2018.1465404.
Herman, K. C., S. L. Prewett, C. L. Eddy, A. Savala, and W. M. Reinke, et al. 2020. “Profiles of Middle School Teacher
Stress and Coping: Concurrent and Prospective Correlates.” Journal of School Psychology 78: 54–68. doi:10.1016/j.
jsp.2019.11.003.
Jeon, L., C. K. Buettner, A. A. Grant. 2017. “Early Childhood Teachers’ Psychological Well-being: Exploring Potential
Predictors of Depression, Stress, and Emotional Exhaustion.” Early Education and Development 29 (1): 53–69.
doi:10.1080/10409289.2017.1341806.
Jurado, D., M. Gurpegui, O. Moreno, and J. de Dios Luna, et al. 1998. “School Setting and Teaching Experience as Risk
Factors for Depressive Symptoms in Teachers.” European Psychiatry 13 (2): 78–81. doi:10.1016/S0924-9338(98)80022-9.
Karasek, R. 1979. “Job Demands, Job Decision Latitude, and Mental Strain: Implications for Job Redesign.”
Administrative Science Quarterly 24 (2): 285–308. doi:10.2307/2392498.
Klassen, R. M. and M. M. Chiu. 2010. “Effects on Teachers’ Self-efficacy and Job Satisfaction: Teacher, Gender, Years of
Experience and Job Stress.” Journal of Educational Psychology 102 (3): 741–56. doi:10.1037/a0019237.
Kyriacou, C. 2001. “Teacher Stress: Directions for Future Research.” Educational Review 53 (1): 27–35. doi:10.1080/
00131910120033628.
Lazarus, R. S. and S. Folkman. 1984. Stress, Appraisal and Coping. New York: Springer.
Lazarus, R. S. 1991. “Progress on a Cognitive-motivational-relational Theory of Emotion.” American Psychologist 46 (8):
819–34. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.46.8.819.
Leung, S. S., Y. Wah Mak, Y. Yu Chui, V. C. Chiang, and A. C. Lee, et al. 2009. “Occupational Stress, Mental Health
Status and Stress Management Behaviors among Secondary School Teachers in Hong Kong.” Health Education
Journal 68 (4): 328–43. doi:10.1177/0017896909349255.
Lovibond, S. and P. Lovibond. 1995. Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales. Sydney: Psychology Foundation.
Machida, T. 2011. Teaching English for the first time: Anxiety among Japanese elementary school-teachers (Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation). USA: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/24324
MacIntyre, P. D., T. Gregersen, and S. Mercer. 2020. “Language Teachers’ Coping Strategies during the Covid-19
Conversion to Online Teaching: Correlations with Stress, Well-being and Negative Emotions.” System 94: 102352.
doi:10.1016/j.system.2020.102352.
Mahan, P. L., M. P. Mahan, N. J. Park, C. Shelton, K. C. Brown, and M. T. Weaver, et al. 2010. “Work Environment
Stressors, Social Support, Anxiety, and Depression among Secondary School Teachers.” AAOHN Journal 58 (5):
197–205. doi:10.1177/216507991005800504.
Martínez-Monteagudo, M. C., C. J. Inglés, L. Granados, D. Aparisi, and J. M. García-Fernández, et al. 2019. “Trait
Emotional Intelligence Profiles, Burnout, Anxiety, Depression, and Stress in Secondary Education Teachers.”
Personality and Individual Differences 142: 53–61. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2019.01.036.
McCormick, J. 1997. “Occupational Stress of Teachers: Biographical Differences in a Large School System.” Journal of
Educational Administration 35 (1): 18–38. doi:10.1108/09578239710156962.
Mearns, J. and J. E. Cain. 2003. “Relationships between Teachers’ Occupational Stress and Their Burnout and Distress:
Roles of Coping and Negative Mood Regulation Expectancies.” Anxiety, Stress, and Coping 16 (1): 71–82. doi:10.1080/
1061580021000057040.
Melchior, M., A. Caspi, B. J. Milne, A. Danese, R. Poulton, and T. E. Moffitt, et al. 2007. “Work Stress Precipitates
Depression and Anxiety in Young Working Women and Men.” Psychological Medicine 37 (8): 1119–29. doi:10.1017/
S0033291707000414.
Paquette, K. R. and S. A. Rieg. 2016. “Stressors and Coping Strategies through the Lens of Early Childhood/Special
Education Pre-service Teachers.” Teaching and Teacher Education 57: 51–58. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.009.
Pithers, R. T. 1995. “Teacher Stress Research: Problems and Progress.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 65 (4):
387–92. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1995.tb01160.x.
Prilleltensky, I., M. Neff, and A. Bessell. 2016. “Teacher Stress: What It Is, Why It’s Important, How It Can Be
Alleviated.” Theory into Practice 55 (2): 104–11. doi:10.1080/00405841.2016.1148986.
Richards, J. 2012. “Teacher Stress and Coping Strategies: A National Snapshot.” The Educational Forum 76 (3): 299–316.
doi:10.1080/00131725.2012.682837.
Seligman, M. 2011. Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being. New York, NY: Simon and
Schuster.
Skaalvik, E. and S. Skaalvik. 2015. “Job Satisfaction, Stress, and Coping Strategies in the Teaching Profession —what Do
Teachers Say?” International Education Studies 8(3). doi: 10.5539/ies.v8n3p181.
Zhong, J., J. You, Y. Gan, Y. Zhang, C. Lu, and H. Wang, et al. 2009. “Job Stress, Burnout, Depression Symptoms, and Physical
Health among Chinese University Teachers.” Psychological Reports 105 (3_suppl): 1248–54. doi:10.2466/ies.v8n3p181.
Copyright of Deviant Behavior is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.