| Abstract: | Subjects in a threat condition were informed that they had failed an important test while subjects in a nonthreat condition were not told that they had failed. To manipulate the use and timing of coping strategies for dealing with threat, subjects were told to (a) redefine the nature and importance of the test before receiving feedback, (b) redefine the nature and importance of the test after feedback, or (c) estimate the performance of their friends on the test (i.e., project) after receiving feedback. Repeated measures of subjective anxiety and pulse rate indicated that (a) the threat manipulation was effective in increasing stress, (b) redefinition occurring before the onset of threat was effective in eliminating stress, and (c) redefinition occuring after the onset of threat was ineffective in reducing stress. Projection reduced the report of subjective anxiety. The results revealed factors that influence coping strategy effectiveness and resolved conflicts in previous findings. |
