1. The ‘Distressed’ or Type-D personality type describes individuals who have a tendency to experience emotional and interpersonal problems. In particular, Type-D personality is characterized by high levels of the familiar personality constructs negative affectivity (NA) and social inhibition (SI). Individuals high on NA are more likely to report interpersonal encounters as stressful and are more likely to appraise stressors with greater stress reactivity. High levels of SI are associated with negative emotionality and personal distress, indicating that persons with Type- D in general report higher levels of stress. The aim of the present study was to examine (1) whether the relationship between Type D personality and perceived stress was mediated by coping (approach vs. avoidance) and (2) the direct and indirect effects of stress and coping on self-reported health. TYPE D PERSONALITY, COPING AND THE EFFECTS ON PERCEIVED STRESS AND HEALTH IN A STUDENT POPULATION REMCO POLMAN 1, ERIKA BORKOLES 1 & SIAN PERRY-WEEKS 2. 1 Victoria University, Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living, Melbourne, Australia & 2 University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom Contact Details: Remco.Polman@vu.edu.au Tel: +61 3 9919 9574 Institute of Sport, Exercise & Active living Introduction Participants: British students (n = 161; 55 males & 106 females) with an average age of 21.24 years. Design: Cross-sectional. Measures: Type D Personality DS14 (Denollet, 2005). Measuring NA, SI and Type D personality. Brief Approach/Avoidance Coping Questionnaire (Finset et al., 2002; 14 items). Perceived Stress Scale (PSS 10; Cohen et al., 1983) with last month time frame. GHQ12 (Goldberg & Williams, 1988) with last few weeks time frame. Procedure: Students completed the questionnaire pack following regular academic classes. Methods Cohen, S., Karmack, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 24, 385-396. Denollet, J. (2005). DS14: Standard assessment of negative affectivity, social inhibition, and Type D personality. Psychosomatic Medicine, 76, 89-97. Finset, A., Steine, S., Haugli, L., Steen, E., & Laerum, E. (2002). The brief approach/avoidance coping questionnaire: Development and validation. Psychology, Health, & Medicine, 7, 75-85. Goldberg, D., & Williams, P.A. (1988). Users guide to the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor: NFER- Nelson. Polman, R.C.J., Borkoles, E., & Nicholls, A.R. (2010). Type D personality, stress and symptoms of burnout: The influence of avoidance coping and social support. British Journal of Health Psychology, 15, 681-696. References Data Analyses & Findings: Path analysis based in structural equation modeling using the maximum-likelihood method of parameter estimation was conducted. This allows for simultaneous examination of multiple direct and indirect predicted paths. The overall fit of the model was good X2(4 N = 161) = 8.25; P =.08; CFI =.98; RMSEA =.08). Also, 31.7% (n = 51) of the participants were classified as Type D (scoring > 10 on both SI and NA). Results Individuals classified as Type D use more passive maladaptive avoidance coping strategies such as resignation and withdrawal which partially mediated the relationship between Type D and stress (Polman, Borkoles, & Nicholls 2010). In addition, higher levels of stress and use of diversion and resignation coping appears to be associated with poorer self-reported health. Take Home Message