Abstract

Across multiple domains, higher levels of psychological flexibility have been found to be associated with lower levels of stress and higher levels of performance. Psychological flexibility is also thought to be related to coping style, with those higher in psychological flexibility thought to use more approach and less avoidant coping strategies. However, evidence to date is largely based on cross-sectional correlations and/or artificial stressors, meaning that the nature of these relationships are unclear.
The primary aim of this study was to examine whether and how psychological flexibility relates to stress and perceived performance, using university exam stress and performance as an opportunistic, predictable, real-world testbed. A secondary aim was to examine whether baseline psychological flexibility was predictive of the strategies that people use to cope with stress. A further aim in the extended paper was to examine whether the effects of psychological flexibility on stress are attributable to differential coping responses.
Ninety-two undergraduate students were recruited to the study. A prospective longitudinal design was utilised to consider the relationships between psychological flexibility, stress and performance. The relationship between psychological flexibility and coping was also considered. There were four data collection points, with participants completing measures on psychological flexibility, stress, coping styles and wellbeing at each timepoint. At the timepoint which coincided with their perceived most important exam, participants were also asked questions on their perceived performance.
Multilevel modelling was used to analyse the relationship between psychological flexibility and stress as well as coping styles. Correlational analyses were run to analyse the relationship between baseline psychological flexibility and perceived performance. A multilevel mediation was run in order to examine whether the relationships between psychological flexibility and stress could be attributable to differential coping responses.
Psychological flexibility was found to be associated with lower levels of stress at baseline. However, during the stressor, there was no interaction effect between psychological flexibility and stress. The magnitude and direction of observed correlations indicated that psychological flexibility may enable individuals to harness stress and (potentially through this) to perceive that they had performed better in their exams – although there was limited power for these latter analyses. Psychological flexibility was associated with less use of avoidant style coping strategies. However, whilst psychological flexibility seems to overlap with coping strategies, the mediational analyses provide support for the hypothesis that psychological flexibility is independent of coping strategies. Therefore, rather than psychological flexibility being the absence of avoidant coping and/or the presence of approach coping, psychological flexibility appears to be characterised by taking effective action.
As psychological flexibility is malleable, it may be a suitable target for intervention to promote an increased ability to harness stress. Future research could focus on the utility of ACT based interventions and track the influence of increased psychological flexibility on an individual’s stress and performance.