4.0 Article

Emotion, Religious Coping, Stigma, and Help-Seeking Attitudes Among Asian Americans: Examination of Moderated Mediation

期刊

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/00916471231212478

关键词

help-seeking attitudes; stigma; religious coping; emotion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the relationship between stigma and help-seeking attitudes among Asian American students. The results showed that self-stigma mediated the association between close others' stigma and help-seeking attitudes. Additionally, religious coping moderated this relationship, while emotion socialization and regulation did not. The findings also highlighted the importance of religious coping and emotion regulation strategies in shaping views of counseling.
While there is an abundance of research on the relationship between stigma and help-seeking attitudes among Asian Americans, few studies have examined how emotion and religious variables influence this relationship. Thus, using a moderated mediation model, we investigated how emotion regulation, emotion socialization, and religious coping might affect the relationship between close others' stigma, self-stigma, and help-seeking among a sample of Asian American students (N = 105) from a Christian university. We predicted that (a) self-stigma would positively mediate the association between close others' stigma and help-seeking attitudes, and (b) emotion regulation, emotion socialization, and religious coping would moderate this relationship. Mediation results showed that close others' stigma was related to self-stigma, which in turn was associated with help-seeking attitudes. Moreover, this mediating relationship was moderated by religious coping (n = 70) but not emotion socialization or regulation; emotion regulation and help-seeking attitudes, however, were positively correlated. These findings highlight the influence of religious coping and emotion regulation strategies on views of counseling, and we reflect on some implications of these findings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据