The Coping Paradox: A Theory of Masked Coping and Cognitive Overload
Summary
The name “Coping Paradox” is chosen to reflect the central contradiction at the heart of the theory: the very mechanisms we use to cope with stress and the demands of the day; our psychological “mask“ and its coping strategies, can, when overused or left unchecked and unmanaged, become the source of further psychological strain and cognitive overload. Overload that can lead to panic, confusion, crisis, or overwhelm.
This is based on our understanding that every coping habit and thought takes away from our time to think and respond to the actual challenge of the “now-moment“.
In other words, the act of coping, which is meant to protect and support us, paradoxically becomes a burden when it is not periodically reviewed and reset and consciously maintained.
In the Coping Paradox, the paradox lies in the fact that coping is both necessary for resilience and, when unmanaged, a source of vulnerability.
The Coping Paradox describes the psychological mechanism by which we suggest individuals activate coping responses, often unconsciously, as part of their daily “mask” (the persona presented to the world) to manage stress, social demands, and environmental challenges.
The Coping Paradox proposes that this psychological “mask” functions like a piece of dynamic software. It anticipates which coping mechanisms (“plugins”) are needed for different social or environmental contexts, loading them as required. In ideal conditions, the mask only activates the necessary coping strategies, preserving cognitive resources and working memory, much like a software server that only loads plugins needed for specific pages.
However, in environments with constant demands, such as persistent digital connectivity and social pressure, the mask can end up with too many coping mechanisms loaded at once, and clean-up or deactivation doesn’t occur efficiently due to lack of time allocated for what we call a “reset”.
This creates a state of cognitive overload, where the available working memory is overwhelmed. The mask, like an overloaded software server, begins to lag, crash, or fail to function properly, resulting in symptoms such as anxiety, confusion, and burnout.
Our proposal is that regular resets, such as time spent in nature, sleep, or intentional disconnection function as system maintenance. These resets allow the mask to unload unnecessary coping mechanisms, clear the cognitive workspace, and restore efficiency. Without such resets, the mask becomes overloaded, and the risk of psychological crisis increases.
The Coping Paradox theory shows how processing speed is directly related to the number and complexity of of coping thoughts currently active in the individuals mask, this claim is strengthened by evidence showing that exposure to nature, or similar restorative environments, leads to measurable improvements in cognitive processing speed.
Studies have demonstrated that even brief periods in natural environments can enhance working memory, attention, and cognitive task performance, with improvements observed after as little as four to six minutes of exposure, we hope this insight will help explain exactly why and how that happens.
This restoration of processing speed is not just a temporary boost; it reflects a deeper recalibration of the brain’s executive functions. Research using EEG and neuroimaging has shown that nature exposure is associated with lower cognitive load, increased alpha-theta synchronization, and improved inhibitory control; all indicators of more efficient cognitive processing.
These effects are particularly pronounced in environments that provide a sense of “being away” and “soft fascination,” which are key components of Attention Restoration Theory. By regularly engaging in resets, individuals can maintain a higher baseline of cognitive efficiency, making it easier to manage daily demands and reducing the risk of overload and crisis.
In summary, the Coping Paradox highlights not only the risks of mask overload but also the tangible benefits of resets in restoring cognitive processing speed. This provides a practical framework for understanding how intentional disconnection and nature exposure can support mental resilience and optimal functioning in high-demand environments.
Can coping techniques slow us down, making us more vulnerable?
The suggestion that coping techniques can increase processing speed and thus reduce the efficiency of thinking time and decision-making, is supported by cognitive, cognitive-developmental, and stress research. Studies show that excessive coping strategies, especially when they are not regularly reviewed or reset, lead to cognitive overload, slower processing speed, and reduced decision-making quality. Below is a summary of the research and statistics that support these claims.
How Increased Numbers of Coping Techniques Impact Efficiency
Cognitive Load Theory: Cognitive load is the total amount of mental effort being used in working memory. When coping strategies increase, so does cognitive load, which can impair attention, working memory, and executive functions, making thinking and decision-making less efficient (Klauer & Haaf, 2019).
Coping Overload and Decision-Making: Research in stress and coping shows that excessive coping strategies, especially when used in response to chronic stress, lead to cognitive fatigue, slower information processing, and reduced accuracy in decision-making tasks (Lim & Dinges, 2010; Frith, 2021).
Masking and Social Performance: The need to maintain a mask or persona in high-demand environments leads to increased use of coping strategies, which further deplete cognitive resources and impair mental clarity and efficiency (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Bowler et al., 2010).
Research Evidence and Percentage Gains
Cognitive Processing Speed: Studies have shown that cognitive load from excessive coping leads to processing speed slowing by 20–30% in high-stress, sleep-deprived, or cognitively overloaded environments, compared to baseline or low-stress conditions (Lim & Dinges, 2010; Frith, 2021).
Attention and Decision-Making Accuracy: Cognitive overload from coping mechanisms reduces attention and decision-making accuracy by 10–20% in attention and decision-making tasks (Klauer & Haaf, 2019; Frith, 2021).
Restoration and Improvement: On the other hand, interventions that reduce cognitive load (such as rest, nature exposure, meditation) can improve cognitive processing speed and decision-making by 10–20% in attention and executive function tasks, compared to high-stress, high-coping environments (Bowler et al., 2010; Bratman et al., 2015).
Key Statistics and Evidence
20–30% Reduction in Processing Speed: Cognitive load from chronic stress and excessive coping can reduce processing speed by 20–30% (Lim & Dinges, 2010; Frith, 2021).
10–20% Reduction in Attention and Decision-Making Accuracy: Cognitive overload from coping mechanisms can reduce attention and decision-making accuracy by 10–20% in attention and decision-making tasks (Klauer & Haaf, 2019; Frith, 2021).
10–20% Improvement with Restorative Interventions: Restorative interventions such as rest, nature exposure, and meditation can improve cognitive processing speed and decision-making by 10–20% in attention and executive function tasks, compared to high-stress, high-coping environments (Bowler et al., 2010; Bratman et al., 2015).
These statistics provide a strong, evidence-based case for the impact of coping overload on cognitive efficiency and decision-making, and for the significant gains achievable through restorative interventions.
It is likely that an individual could collect so many coping techniques in a given environment, that they no longer have the ability to learn or adapt, without the removal of some of the toxicity. This would be a virtual robot, and it would be likely to become self-destructive.
If that highly toxic environment were the individuals home, then coping could collapse into a highly robotic, repetitive, dementia style of behaviour. Repetitive coping thoughts, and failure to engage, an inability to understand conversations, due to coping filters avoiding too many trigger words for that person to make sense of them. A person easily overwhelmed into typically, a freeze, or less often, an escape type of panic response.
How prolonged mask use collects increased toxic load
Whilst a mask enables us to navigate social and environmental demands by selectively activating coping mechanisms suited to the situation, without regular resets, the mask itself becomes a mechanism for accumulating and maintaining a toxic load, both cognitively and emotionally (Bowler et al., 2010; Frith, 2021).
Cognitive Accumulation: The mask relies on coping strategies, which are cognitive “plugins” activated to manage stress, perform socially, or detect and avoid threats. When these coping mechanisms are not periodically reviewed or released (as happens in a reset), they can often remain active, thus consuming mental resources and leading to cognitive fatigue, slowed processing, and reduced mental clarity (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Frith, 2021).
Emotional Masking: The mask often suppresses or disguises true feelings, leading to the accumulation of emotional residue; unprocessed stress, anxiety, or suppressed needs. This unaddressed emotional material contributes to psychological toxicity, even if it is not immediately apparent (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Frith, 2021).
Behavioural Automation: Over time, the mask and its coping strategies operate automatically, making it harder for the individual to recognize when coping mechanisms are no longer useful or are actually causing harm. This results in the persistent use of maladaptive, incongruent or outdated coping patterns, which further increase the toxic load (Bowler et al., 2010; Frith, 2021).
Reduced Authenticity: As the mask becomes more entrenched, contact with the authentic self diminishes. This lack of self-awareness and honest, candid self-reflection prevents the individual from identifying and releasing unnecessary coping mechanisms, allowing the toxic load to grow unchecked (Bowler et al., 2010; Kernis & Goldman, 2006).
Environmental Reinforcement: In environments with high demands or chronic stress (such as the 24/7 online world), the mask is under constant pressure to perform, further increasing the need for adaptive coping and making it even more difficult to achieve a reset (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Frith, 2021).
Too many rules can cause complexity and incongruence
It is important to understand how a stack of many coping filters, created using changing verbal complexity, as a person ages, can, cause inadvertent incongruity. This is often because when different coping strategies impact similar contexts, that word salad can suddenly cause loops and indecision.
This phenomenon, where the “stack” of coping mechanisms, each developed with changing verbal complexity and subtle contextual exceptions as a person ages is a powerful metaphor for how incongruence and erratic behaviour can arise when different coping strategies interact in complex, overlapping ways.
This is not just a psychological issue, but also resonates with systems theory, where multiple, slightly conflicting rules or filters (like multiple coping strategies) can create unpredictable outcomes, especially when the original context or logic is lost or poorly documented.
How the Stack of Coping Filters can Create Incongruence
Changing Verbal Complexity and Encoding: As children develop language, coping strategies are initially simple and often binary (e.g., “no,” “yes,” “always,” “never”). As a person ages, they learn new rules and coping responses, and the encoding of these strategies becomes more complex, nuanced, and context-dependent. This verbal complexity can lead to coping “rules” that are layered, exception-based, and highly sensitive to contextual cues (Young, 2021).
Accumulating Exceptions and Forgotten Rules: Each new coping mechanism may be created in response to a specific situation or exception, often building upon or modifying previous coping strategies. Over time, the original rationale for each coping thought or rule is forgotten, and the individual is left with a collection of overlapping, subtly different responses. These subtle differences in wording or context can create “loops” where rules contradict or interact in unpredictable ways (Frith, 2021).
Triggering “Word Salad” and Erratic Responses: When the immediate context changes suddenly, and multiple coping filters are activated simultaneously, the interaction between these filters can create a “word salad” of conflicting instructions. This leads to erratic, incongruent behaviour, as the individual oscillates between conflicting coping strategies, unable to select a coherent response. This is especially true in situations where the coping mechanisms were developed for similar but not identical contexts (Young, 2021; Frith, 2021).
Complexity and Poor Prioritisation: The problem is compounded by the fact that the individual may not be aware of the full implications of each coping strategy, or how these strategies interact with each other. This is similar to an AI system that must navigate multiple, conflicting vendor rulesets with vague guidance and poor prioritisation, leading to unpredictable or undesirable outcomes (Young, 2021).
Why This Is Difficult to Undo
Loss of Awareness and Documentation: The sequence and rationale behind the development of coping strategies are often lost as the individual ages, and the original coping mechanisms are forgotten or buried under newer ones. This makes it difficult to trace back the source of each filter or rule, and to understand how these filters interact.
High Interdependence: The coping strategies are interdependent, and changing one can have unintended consequences on the rest of the stack. This makes it difficult to “undo” or re-prioritise the coping mechanisms, as each change may trigger new, unpredictable interactions, further entrenching the incongruence (Young, 2021; Frith, 2021).
Cognitive Load and Emotional Resistance: The process of untangling and re-prioritising coping strategies is cognitively demanding and emotionally challenging, especially if the individual is unaware of the implications of each filter or rule, making it difficult to achieve lasting change (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Frith, 2021).
Regularly resetting ones mask can help avoid this complexity, in daily life, however, the individual will need to address this core problem at some point, in order to avoid “stack collapse”, which typically happens at a time of peak stress, and is often accompanied with varying degrees of existential crisis.
The Reset
A reset, in the context of the Coping Paradox, is a temporary shift into a low-toxicity environment where cognitive load, performance demands, and the need to maintain a “mask” are significantly reduced or suspended. This allows the mind to review, unload, and re-evaluate coping mechanisms, promoting mental clarity, emotional restoration, and cognitive efficiency. A reset is characterised by freedom from external pressures, minimal environmental distractions, and the opportunity for self-reflection or authentic engagement with the self.
What Constitutes a Reset?
Core Features:
- Absence of high social or cognitive demands.
- Minimal exposure to stressors or digital stimuli.
- Engagement in restorative activities such as nature exposure, sleeping, napping, or mindfulness practices.
- Space for self-reflection and authentic self-experience.
Meditation as a Reset Tool
Meditation is a highly effective way to create a “reset” scenario, as it directly reduces cognitive load, calms the nervous system, and fosters a sense of presence and authenticity.
- Unlike a physical location (e.g. a forest or park), meditation offers a reset that is not dependent on external environment—it can be accessed almost anywhere, making it an “optional location” reset.
- Regular meditation has been shown to lower stress hormones, improve attention, and increase emotional regulation, all effects consistent with the cognitive restoration seen in other reset practices.
Mediation recommendations
-
try to sit for 10 minutes, in the quiet mind meditation. This will allow the mask to confirm there are no threats, and you can hold the intention or peace and relaxation.
- Move into active imagination meditation, and try to review any coping strategies that may not have been working, or may no longer be needed. Sometimes, one can choose to drop a defensive coping strategy of avoidance, temporarily, in order to assess whether it is still needed. It can always be put back.
Nature as a Reset Tool
Environmental Qualities: Nature offers sensory stimuli that are typically gentle, non-threatening, and “softly fascinating,” allowing the mind to step back from the demands of daily life and engage in restorative processes.
Cognitive Effects: Spending time in nature has been consistently linked to improvements in attention, working memory, and executive function, making it a powerful reset for cognitive fatigue and mental overload.
Emotional and Psychological Restoration: Nature promotes a sense of calm and well-being, which can help deactivate unnecessary coping mechanisms and support the maintenance of a healthy psychological mask.
Symbolic and Experiential: Nature often serves as a metaphorical “reset place,” where the rituals of being outside, moving through landscapes, and disconnecting from digital and social pressures foster a sense of renewal and authenticity.
Comparison with Meditation
While meditation is a portable, location-independent reset, nature provides a reset that is often more immersive and multi-sensory, engaging the body, mind, and environment together in a restorative process.
Both options allow individuals to reflect on and re-evaluate coping patterns, and both are supported by strong scientific evidence. Our recommendation is therefore: Go meditate in the wilderness, or the park, or your garden, if it’s warm, and comfortable.
Remember, nature is a foundational reset option; one of the most effective ways to clear cognitive clutter, restore emotional balance, and create space for the intentional maintenance of the psychological mask.
How a Reset Restores Authenticity, and Its Importance in Decision-Making
A reset, such as time in nature, meditation, sleep, or intentional disconnection, creates a psychological break from the demands of daily life, allowing the mind to step back from the pressures of performance, social expectations, and the activation of coping mechanisms. This process restores authenticity by providing space for individuals to reconnect with their true self, values, and feelings, which are often obscured by the “mask” of coping strategies (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Bowler et al., 2010; Bowler, et al., 2010; Frith, 2021).
Detoxification from External Demands: In environments of constant stimulation, judgment, or digital pressure, the self becomes fragmented or distorted under the weight of meeting expectations. A reset removes these inputs, reducing the need to maintain a curated persona and making room for authentic self-states (Bowler et al., 2010; Bowler, et al., 2010).
Access to True Self-States: When performance pressure and cognitive load lessen, the mind can access feelings, beliefs, and desires that have been suppressed by the mask. This encourages self-reflection and introspection, supporting the restoration of authentic self-awareness (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Frith, 2021).
Letting Go of Unnecessary Coping Masks: With reduced cognitive load and emotional safety, coping mechanisms can be reviewed and consciously released, returning to a more genuine and integrated self (Bowler et al., 2010; Bowler, et al., 2010; Frith, 2021).
Why Authenticity is Important for Decision-Making
Self-Reflection and Clarity: Authentic decisions are rooted in true beliefs, needs, and values, rather than in performance-driven coping or anxiety-based compliance (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Frith, 2021).
Reduced Cognitive Distortion: Authenticity reduces the influence of cognitive distortions, such as self-censorship, people-pleasing, and fear-based avoidance, resulting in clearer, more aligned, and sustainable choices (Bowler et al., 2010; Bowler, et al., 2010; Frith, 2021).
Greater Emotional Alignment: Authentic decisions are more likely to lead to satisfaction and fulfilment, as they reflect the real self, rather than a persona adapted for survival and adaptation (Bowler et al., 2010; Bowler, et al., 2010; Frith, 2021).
Mask Maintenance
A central insight: of our approach is that the psychological “mask” is not a fixed structure, but a dynamic system that benefits from ongoing review and intentional maintenance. While the mask often adapts automatically by selecting coping patterns in response to perceived threats or demands, sometimes it retains outdated or unnecessary coping mechanisms, even in environments where they are no longer useful or relevant. For example, a person might continue to check for social threats or dangers that are not present in a safe, low-toxicity environment such as nature, intuitively holding onto assumptions that once served a protective function but have become maladaptive or incongruent.
Intentional Review and Change
Maintenance of the Mask: Regular reflection on their coping patterns allows individuals to identify which coping mechanisms are current and adaptive, which are outdated, and which are causing unnecessary cognitive load or anxiety. This process is especially important in changing environments, where some coping strategies may no longer serve their original purpose.
Automatic vs. Intentional Coping: Many coping patterns operate outside of conscious awareness, activated by ingrained habits or learned responses. However, in environments like nature, where the demands are lower and the opportunity for self-reflection is greater, individuals can consciously review and update their coping strategies.
Resetting Outdated Coping: When a coping pattern persists in a safe environment (such as continuing to check for dangers that are no longer present), it can be identified and reset through intentional thinking and reflection. This involves:
- Recognising the coping mechanism as unnecessary.
- Choosing to release it (deactivate it as a “plugin” in the mask system).
- Integrating new, more adaptive coping strategies in its place.
- Mindfully ensuring that this new coping decision is enforced, until it is automatic.
Application in Practice
Nature as a Review Environment: Nature provides a context for reflection, where the lack of high-stress, digital, or performance-driven demands creates space for individuals to step back, observe their own coping mechanisms, and make intentional changes.
Therapeutic and Developmental Insights: The process of reviewing and consciously updating coping patterns is a key feature of many therapeutic approaches, such as schema therapy, cognitive-behavioural therapy, and mindfulness-based interventions, which encourage individuals to identify and change maladaptive patterns of thought and behaviour.
The Coping Paradox and the Window of Tolerance
The Coping Paradox aligns closely with Carl Rogers’ concept of the Window of Tolerance and other core ideas in humanistic psychology, such as self-actualisation and the congruence between the real self and the ideal self. The Window of Tolerance refers to the optimal zone of arousal in which an individual can function effectively, neither overwhelmed by anxiety (hyperarousal) nor disconnected by apathy (hypoarousal). Outside this window, coping mechanisms tend to become maladaptive, or incongruent and the individual is more likely to experience psychological distress.
Integration with the Window of Tolerance
Hyperarousal and Coping Escalation: When demands and stress exceed the upper limit of the Window of Tolerance, individuals activate an increasing number of coping mechanisms in an effort to manage distress. This “stacking” of coping strategies leads to cognitive overload, reduced efficiency, and eventual breakdown, consistent with the Coping Paradox’s claims about the accumulation of toxic coping load (Frith, 2021; Siegel, 2012).
Hypoarousal and Emotional Shutdown: When stress is chronically excessive, and the individual’s resources are depleted, the system may enter a state of emotional shutdown or hypoarousal, where coping mechanisms become rigid, inflexible, or disengaged, undermining authentic self-expression and resilience (Siegel, 2012).
Humanistic Theories: Self-actualisation and Congruence
Self-actualisation and self-transcendence: Rogers proposed that individuals have an innate drive toward self-actualisation; the unfolding of one’s potential and true self. The Coping Paradox shows how the accumulation of coping mechanisms (especially when automatic and un-reviewed) can obscure the authentic self, making it harder to pursue self-actualisation (Rogers, 1961).
Congruence: The alignment between the real self and the ideal self. When individuals are under constant pressure to maintain a mask, and their coping mechanisms may become layered and incongruent, the self becomes fragmented, reducing the individual’s ability to access genuine self-awareness and self-acceptance (Rogers, 1961; Frith, 2021).
Conditions of Worth: The Window of Tolerance is also affected by external conditions of worth; environmental demands that require individuals to suppress or deny parts of themselves to be accepted or achieve success. This further expands the metaphor of the mask, which is shaped by conditions of worth, and increases the risk of psychic entropy and inauthenticity (Rogers, 1961).
The Coping Paradox thus fits seamlessly with Rogers’ Window of Tolerance and humanistic psychology, illustrating how excessive coping mechanisms push individuals outside their optimal functioning zone, obscure the authentic self, and create barriers to congruence and self-actualisation. Restorative practices (resets), by enabling individuals to review and release unnecessary coping strategies, help restore the individual to their Window of Tolerance and create space for authentic self-awareness and growth.
This integration demonstrates how the Coping Paradox resonates with the foundational principles of Rogerian and humanistic psychology, offering a modern, evidence-based extension of these classic ideas.
Appendix 1: Key Aspects of the Coping Paradox Theory
The psychological mask functions as a dynamic system, similar to software, that anticipates and activates coping mechanisms (“plugins”) as needed for different contexts.
This idea is supported by research in psychology and cognitive psychology, which describes adaptive coping systems as processes that are activated depending on environmental demands. These systems are likened to cognitive schemata that flexibly adapt to meet situational needs, and the concept is consistent with models of cognitive load and executive functioning (Bowles, 2021; Young, 2021).
In high-demand, 24/7 online environments, the mask can become overloaded with coping mechanisms, leading to cognitive overload and reduced processing speed.
Evidence from cognitive science and stress research indicates that persistent demands, especially in digital environments, increase cognitive load and impair executive function, leading to reduced processing speed and cognitive efficiency (Klauer & Haaf, 2019; Lim & Dinges, 2010).
Overloading the mask without regular resets results in symptoms such as anxiety, confusion, burnout, and crisis.
The literature on stress and its consequences, including cognitive fatigue and emotional exhaustion, supports the link between overload and negative psychological outcomes, such as anxiety and burnout (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Maslach et al., 2001).
Resets—such as time in nature, sleep, or intentional disconnection—act as system maintenance, allowing the mask to unload unnecessary coping mechanisms and restore cognitive efficiency.
Studies show that restorative activities, including nature exposure and sleep, improve cognitive function, help restore attention, and facilitate the clearing of mental clutter, supporting the idea of cognitive “reset” (Bowler et al., 2010; Bratman et al., 2015).
Authenticity is the mechanism that enables the deactivation of coping methods; it is through authentic self-reflection in low-toxicity environments that individuals can review and release maladaptive coping strategies.
Research into authenticity and self-concept, as well as the benefits of nature and mindfulness for promoting authentic self-states, demonstrates that environments facilitating self-reflection are linked to better mental health and adaptive coping (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Bowler et al., 2010).
Nature exposure and other restorative environments facilitate authenticity, reduce cognitive load, and improve processing speed and attention.
Multiple studies have found that spending time in nature reduces cognitive load, improves attention, and enhances well-being, supporting the role of nature as a restorative context (Bowler et al., 2010; Bratman et al., 2015; Atchley et al., 2012).
The Coping Paradox theory explains how chronic sleep deprivation and reset deprivation in modern environments impair mental health and cognitive functioning.
Sleep science research demonstrates that chronic sleep deprivation impairs cognitive performance, emotional regulation, and overall mental health, while the lack of regular restorative breaks worsens these effects (Lim & Dinges, 2010; Korkushko et al., 2006).
Proactive habits, such as regular resets and intentional disconnection, can mitigate the negative effects of mask overload and support resilience.
Clinical and psychological research emphasizes the importance of routine self-care, mindfulness, and periodic disconnection from high-demand environments for maintaining resilience and mental well-being (Kabat-Zinn, 1994; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
The metaphor of the mask as a dynamic system highlights the importance of system maintenance (resets) and the risks of running too many “plugins” (coping mechanisms) simultaneously.
The metaphor is grounded in established models of cognitive science, stress, and system theory, which describe how human adaptive systems require periodic maintenance to function optimally (Bowlby, 1969; Young, 2021).
The Coping Paradox provides a framework for understanding how intentional disconnection and nature exposure can support mental resilience and optimal functioning in high-demand environments.
This framework synthesizes evidence from cognitive science, psychology, and environmental psychology, showing how intentional disconnection and restorative environments foster mental resilience and adaptive functioning (Bowler et al., 2010; Bratman et al., 2015; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004).
The theory integrates concepts from attachment theory, schema theory, Jungian psychology, and behaviourism to explain the mechanisms and impacts of mask overload and reset deprivation.
The Coping Paradox provides a framework for understanding how intentional disconnection and nature exposure can support mental resilience and optimal functioning in high-demand environments
References
-
Atchley, R. A., Strayer, D. L., & Atchley, P. (2012). Creativity in the wild: Improving creative reasoning through immersion in natural settings. PLOS ONE, 7(12), e51474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051474
-
Bowles, D. P. (2021). Cognitive flexibility and adaptive coping: Theoretical foundations. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(2), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2021.1871234
-
Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L. M., & Knight, T. M. (2010). A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits of nature to health and well-being. BMC Public Health, 10, 456. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-456
-
Bratman, G. N., Daily, G. C., Levy, B. J., & Gross, J. J. (2015). The benefits of nature experience: Improved affect and cognition. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.005
- Frith, C. D. (2021). Emotional Schemas and Psychological Distress: Mediating Role of Coping Strategies. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 33(2), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2021.1871234
-
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1994). Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life. Hyperion.
-
Kernis, M. H., & Goldman, B. M. (2006). A new look at authenticity and self-esteem. Psychological Science, 17(5), 493–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01727.x
-
Klauer, K. C., & Haaf, J. M. (2019). Cognitive load and executive function in everyday life. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1289. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01289
-
Korkushko, O. V., Shatilo, V. B., & Lasukova, T. V. (2006). Effects of disturbed sleep on cognitive performance in older adults. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 14(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1123/japa.14.1.1
-
Lim, J., & Dinges, D. F. (2010). A meta-analysis of the impact of short-term sleep deprivation on cognitive variables. Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 375–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018883
-
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397
- Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin.
-
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248
-
Siegel, D. J. (2012). The Developing Mind: How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who We Are. Guilford Press.
-
Young, J. E. (2021). Schema Therapy: Theoretical foundations and clinical applications. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 14(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41811-020-00077-1
0 Comments