Among any population there is a wide variation in how stress is perceived — Page 143, Lesson 219

Let’s start with a fundamental point: stress is not the same for everyone. Among any population there is a wide variation in how stress is perceived. At one extreme, some individuals suppress knowledge of problems and thereby appear not to perceive them or require stress coping strategies. At the other extreme are those who are highly sensitive to problems — they will anticipate difficulties not perceived by others and employ coping strategies to avoid the stress experience. So the key idea is that people differ in how they detect and respond to stressors. That brings us to the coping strategies themselves, which can be classified into three categories: Action Coping, Cognitive Coping, and Symptom Directed Coping. Let’s take Action Coping first. In action coping, the individual attempts to reduce stress by taking some action. He reduces the level of demand by either removing the problem or changing the situation so that it becomes less demanding. For example, a pilot asked to fly in marginal conditions could refuse, thus removing the immediate stressor. However, this action could lead to another stressor — loss of employment. So you see, removing one stressor can introduce another. The demand could be changed, however, by delaying take-off for a few hours when the weather is forecast to improve. In this case, you reduce the perceived demand of the original task without substituting another stressor. The individual may also hand over some tasks, either to other crew members, or to Air Traffic Control by asking for, as an example, assistance in navigation. Another option: the individual may remove himself from the stress situation by changing his job, or in the case of domestic stress, by divorce. But these methods may only substitute one source of stress for another. Clearly, in many cases it is impossible to undertake this kind of solution. Now, Cognitive Coping. Since action coping cannot change some situations, cognitive coping involves reducing the impact of stress on the individual. Our brain can employ ‘defence mechanisms’ which operate outside our conscious awareness — a system of repression or denial to prevent the conscious brain from even becoming aware of the stressor. Other strategies involve rationalization or detachment, which may change the perceived magnitude of the problem. For example, telling yourself “Pretend it’s a simulator detail the same as the one you did last week” will enable the conscious mind to perceive the problem as having a solution. So cognitive coping doesn’t change the external situation; it changes how you perceive it. Then we have Symptom Directed Coping. Some of the symptoms of stress may be relieved by the use of drugs. In this context, the drugs may be relatively simple such as coffee or tea. Other cases may be eased by the use of alcohol or tobacco. But it must be emphasized that only the symptoms are treated by this form of coping, and that the stressor(s) will remain until addressed separately. So symptom-directed coping is a temporary measure, not a solution to the underlying cause. Finally, let’s look at Coping with Stress on the Flight Deck. Coping is the process whereby the individual either adjusts to the perceived demand of the situation or changes the situation itself. Some coping changes appear to be carried out unconsciously; it is only if they are unsuccessful that we consciously take note of the stressor. To reduce the effect of stress in flight involves mainly psychological mechanisms and includes behavioural patterns which can be learned. That’s an important point for you as a pilot — these coping patterns are not just innate; they can be learned and practiced.