4.7 Article

Conscientiousness Moderates the Relationship Between Perceived Stress and Depressive Symptoms Among US Chinese Older Adults

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/gerona/glw172

Keywords

Depression; Stress; Personality; Neuroticism and Conscientiousness

Funding

  1. National Institute on Aging [R01 AG042318, R01 MD006173, R01 AG11101, RC4 AG039085]
  2. Paul B. Beeson Award in Aging [K23 AG030944]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The present study examined whether individuals' personality traits, Neuroticism and Conscientiousness, moderated the relationship between perceived stress and depressive symptoms among U.S. Chinese older adults. Methods: Data analysis was based on the Population Study of Chinese Elderly in Chicago (PINE). Three thousand one hundred and fifty-nine Chinese adults aged 60 years and older participated in the PINE study. They completed scales that assessed their personality (ie, Neuroticism and Conscientiousness of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory), perceived stress (the Chinese Perceived Stress Scale), and depressive symptoms (the Patient Health Questionnaire). Results: Perceived stress was positively related to depressive symptoms among U.S. Chinese older adults. No moderation effects were found for Neuroticism. Conscientiousness significantly moderated the perceived stress-depressive symptom relationship. The positive relationship between perceived stress and depressive symptoms was weaker for people who were higher in Conscientiousness than those who were lower in Conscientiousness. Conclusion: Conscientiousness mitigated the stress-depressive symptom relationship among U.S. Chinese older adults. Future research is needed to identify the psychological and sociocultural profiles of individuals who show stress resilience and those who are vulnerable. Social services and psychological interventions are needed to promote health and well-being among U.S. Chinese older adults.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available