to reduce discrepancy by lowering one’s personal goals, so that suboptimal
performance is reappraised as acceptable (avoidance). A third option is to
adopt self-critical and ruminative strategies that are liable to perpetuate
worry about personal difficulties and interfere with task-relevant cognition
(emotion–focus). Empirical studies, for example, are beginning to show that
use of these coping strategies does indeed correlate with performance on cer-
tain tasks, and may mediate some effects of subjective state. Test anxiety re-
lates to maladaptive patterns of coping (Matthews, Hillyard, & Campbell,
1999), that may influence intellectual functioning. In sum, the same appraisal
and coping processes that control subjective state response to stressors may
also influence how stress response impacts on performance, and conse-
quently, changes in the external environment.
The Role of Traits
There is an extensive literature on states as correlates of traits. A simple equa-
tion is often made between extraversion and positive affect, and neuroticism
and negative affect (e.g., Watson, 2000). Elsewhere, we have rejected this
view as simplistic (Matthews & Gilliland, 1999). It does not adequately ex-
plain the situational moderation of trait–state correlations, or the modest
magnitudes of trait–state correlations observed in controlled settings. Traits
166 MATTHEWS AND ZEIDNER
FIG. 6.9. A self-regulative model of coping.