self-blame

Information technology (IT) professionals in India work under tight deadlines, long hours, job insecurity and rapid technological change, and Indian studies report substantial levels of stress, depressive symptoms and burnout in this group. How employees cope may help explain why some function well under these conditions while others do not. This narrative review synthesises research on coping strategies and psychological well-being among Indian IT professionals, drawing also on studies of other Indian occupational groups and international technology workers, with particular attention to gender. The evidence shows that approach-oriented strategies such as planning, active coping, positive reframing, acceptance and seeking support are generally associated with better well-being, whereas denial, behavioural disengagement, substance use and self-blame are associated with poorer well-being. Gender findings are inconsistent: some studies report higher stress or burnout among women, while others find no gender difference in depression, anxiety or well-being. Most studies are cross-sectional, use differing measures and were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. The review identifies the need for strategy-level analysis of coping, gender-balanced samples, research in under-studied IT hubs such as Gurgaon, and longitudinal designs.

Objective Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is an urgent and substantial public health concern among adolescents. This study is aimed at identifying the independent psychological predictors of NSSI and developing and validating a logistic regression-based risk discrimination model focused on coping styles. Methods A cross-sectional study involving 206 adolescents (104 with NSSI and 102 healthy controls) was conducted. All the participants provided general demographic data, and completed the Experiences in Close Relationships Inventory (ECR), the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-Short Form Version (CTQ-SF), and the Coping Styles Questionnaire (CSQ). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the independent predictors of NSSI. A nomogram was constructed in accordance with the final multivariate model. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration plots, the Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) test, and a decision curve analysis (DCA). Results Multivariate logistic regression revealed that a higher level of self-blame (OR = 1.062; 95% CI: 1.023–1.102; P = 0.002) was an independent risk factor, whereas a better problem-solving capacity (OR = 0.911; 95% CI: 0.867–0.957; P < 0.001) was an independent protective factor for adolescents with NSSI. Attachment dimensions and childhood trauma did not retain independent significance after adjustment. The nomogram showed excellent discrimination (AUC = 0.951, 95% CI: 0.922–0.980), good calibration (HL test P > 0.05), and superior clinical net benefit across a wide threshold (0.01–0.99). Conclusion Targeting self-blame and enhancing problem-solving skills may be effective styles for the prevention of adolescent NSSI. As a preliminary finding, the nomogram developed in our study is a useful tool for exploratory differentiation.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive emotion regulation may play an important role in psychological resilience; however, its association with resilience may be influenced by various factors, including cognitive ability and psychiatric symptoms. We examined whether specific cognitive emotion-regulation strategies remained associated with resilience after accounting for these factors. METHODS: We analyzed the data of 149 healthy young adults. Psychological resilience and cognitive emotion-regulation strategies were assessed using the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale and Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ). Partial correlation analyses were performed after adjusting for demographic characteristics; full-scale intelligence quotient; and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In the multiple regression model, all nine CERQ subscales were entered simultaneously with these covariates, and a stepwise model was used for the exploratory analysis. RESULTS: After full adjustment, the five adaptive strategies and rumination were positively associated with resilience and remained significant after Holm correction, whereas self-blame showed only a nominal association that did not survive the correction. Positive reappraisal (r=0.691) and refocus on planning (r=0.655) showed the strongest associations. In the regression model, only positive reappraisal (β=0.348, p<0.001) and refocus on planning (β=0.289, p<0.001) were independently associated with higher resilience (adjusted R²=0.627), and the exploratory stepwise model retained both strategies. CONCLUSION: Positive reappraisal and refocus on planning showed robust associations with psychological resilience after adjusting for demographic, cognitive, and psychological factors. Adaptive reinterpretation of stressful experiences and goal-directed planning may represent particularly relevant cognitive emotion-regulation correlates of psychological resilience.

زمینه: تنظیم هیجان شناختی ممکن است نقش مهمی در تاب‌آوری روان‌شناختی ایفا کند؛ با این حال، ارتباط آن با تاب‌آوری ممکن است تحت تأثیر عوامل مختلفی از جمله توانایی شناختی و علائم روان‌پزشکی قرار گیرد. ما بررسی کردیم که آیا راهبردهای خاص تنظیم هیجان شناختی پس از کنترل این عوامل همچنان با تاب‌آوری مرتبط باقی می‌مانند یا خیر. روش‌ها: داده‌های ۱۴۹ بزرگسال جوان سالم مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. تاب‌آوری روان‌شناختی و راهبردهای تنظیم هیجان شناختی با استفاده از مقیاس تاب‌آوری Connor-Davidson و پرسشنامه تنظیم هیجان شناختی (CERQ) ارزیابی شد. تحلیل‌های همبستگی جزئی پس از تعدیل برای ویژگی‌های جمعیت‌شناختی؛ بهره هوشی مقیاس کامل؛ و علائم افسردگی، اضطراب و اختلال نقص توجه/بیش‌فعالی انجام شد. در مدل رگرسیون چندگانه، هر ۹ زیرمقیاس CERQ به طور همزمان همراه با این متغیرهای کمکی وارد شدند و برای تحلیل اکتشافی از مدل گام‌به‌گام استفاده شد. یافته‌ها: پس از تعدیل کامل، پنج راهبرد سازگارانه و نشخوار فکری با تاب‌آوری ارتباط مثبت داشتند و پس از اصلاح هولم همچنان معنادار باقی ماندند، در حالی که سرزنش خود تنها ارتباط اسمی نشان داد که پس از اصلاح معنادار نبود. بازنگری مثبت (r=0.691) و تمرکز مجدد بر برنامه‌ریزی (r=0.655) قوی‌ترین ارتباط را نشان دادند. در مدل رگرسیون، تنها بازنگری مثبت (β=0.348, p<0.001) و تمرکز مجدد بر برنامه‌ریزی (β=0.289, p<0.001) به طور مستقل با تاب‌آوری بالاتر مرتبط بودند (R² تعدیل‌شده=0.627) و مدل اکتشافی گام‌به‌گام هر دو راهبرد را حفظ کرد. نتیجه‌گیری: بازنگری مثبت و تمرکز مجدد بر برنامه‌ریزی پس از تعدیل برای عوامل جمعیت‌شناختی، شناختی و روان‌شناختی ارتباط قوی با تاب‌آوری روان‌شناختی نشان دادند. تفسیر سازگارانه تجارب استرس‌زا و برنامه‌ریزی هدف‌محور ممکن است به‌عنوان همبسته‌های شناختی تنظیم هیجان به‌ویژه مرتبط با تاب‌آوری روان‌شناختی مطرح باشند.