초록

AI-Helper

스트레스는 현대인의 생활과정 중에서 피할 수 없는 일부분이다 .그러나 스트레스를 어떻게 대처하는가 하는 것도 업무의 효율성 측면에 있어서는 매우 중요한 요인이 되고 있다. 다시 말해, 스트레스는 대처행동에 따라 그 효과가 달라진다는 것으로, 동일한 스트레스원에 당면하더라도 개인적인 성격특성에 따라 어떤 사람은 강렬한 스트레스를 경험하기도 하고 또 다른 사람은 미약하거나 경험하지 않기도 한다. 이러한 관점에서 볼 때 개인적인 성격특성은 스트레스 대처행동에 영향을 줄 수 있는 중요한 요인임을 알 수 있다. 따라서 본 연구의 목적은 성격특성과 스트레스 대처행동과의 관계를 규명하고 아울러 성격특성과 스트레스 대처효과 즉, 적응과의 관계를 알아보고자 하는 것이다. 보다 효과적으로 적응할 수 있는 성격특성이 무엇인지를 규명하는 동시에 각 성격특성의 소유자들이 어떤 양식으로 스트레스원에 대처하는가를 밝혀줌으로써, 경호업무 수행자들의 행동을 이해하고 그들의 적응을 지도해 나가는데 필요한 자료를 제공하는데 의의를 두고자 한다.

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

1. There was significant relationship between personality traits and coping behavior. (1) Type A Group used more problem-focused and emotion-focused coping style than Type B Group (2) Non-sociable group used more emotion-focused coping style especially 'escape-avoidance' behavior than sociable group...

1. There was significant relationship between personality traits and coping behavior. (1) Type A Group used more problem-focused and emotion-focused coping style than Type B Group (2) Non-sociable group used more emotion-focused coping style especially 'escape-avoidance' behavior than sociable group (3) Emotionally unstable group used more emotion-focused coping style especially 'distancing' and 'escape-avoidance behavior than stable group. 2. There was no significant relationship between personality traits and stress coping effect except emotional stability. 3. There was same inter-correlations among personality, coping style, and coping effect, (1) Type A was significantly correlated with sociability but not with emotional stability. (2) Problem-focused coping style was positively correlated with emotion-focused coping style. (3) Coping effect was not significantly correlated with coping style and personality traits accept emotional stability. 4. There was significant relationship between cognitive appraisal and coping style. (1) When they appraised the event 'could change or did something about it,' that used more problem-focused coping style than appraised 'had to accept.' (2) When they appraised the event ' could control before it occures.' they used more problem-focused and emotion-focused coping style than appraised it 'could not control'. (3) When they appraised the event 'had to gold back.' they used more problem-focused and emotion-focused coping style than appraised it 'had not to hold back.' (4) When they appraised the event 'happened by me.' they used more problem-focused coping style than appraised it 'happened by others.' (5) When they appraised the event 'needed to know more, 'they did not significantly use more coping behavior than appraised it 'needed not to know more.' 5. There was no significant difference except two cases in cognitive appraisal to the problem according to the personality. The two cases were as follows: (1) Sociability group appraised the event 'had to accept.' while non-sociability group appraised it 'could change or did some thing about.' (2) Emotionally stable group appraised the event 'happened by others.' while emotionally unstable group appraised it "happened by me".

주제어