(PS10-75) Making Meaning of Stress: An Examination of the Meaning Making Process Among High Achieving, High School Students of Color

Meaning making (MM) is a dynamic process of understanding and finding meaning, value, or significance in experiences of stress (Park & Folkman 1997; Park 2010). In studies examining the effects of expressive writing, engaging in MM when reflecting on a stressful event (Pennebaker, 2000) contributed to decreased maladaptive coping and improved well-being (Park & Blumberg, 2002; Saldanha & Barclay, 2021; Zheng et al., 2019). This may be particularly relevant for high achieving, high students of color who face unique stressors and barriers within and outside the education system (Doan et al., 2022; Keltner et al., 2003). The current study will examine correlates of MM during expressive writing among high-achieving, high school students of color to: 1) investigate whether the characteristics of stressful events are associated with MM (e.g., types of stressors, objective threat), 2) explore how MM is achieved (e.g., cognitive reappraisal, emotional processing, cultural values), and 3) describe the types of meaning derived (e.g., understanding and/or finding significance in the event). Data were collected as part of a randomized control trial (RCT) evaluating the impact of a mindfulness-based intervention for high-achieving adolescents of color. Directed-content qualitative analysis was used to code the essays (Assarroudi et al., 2018). The first step included deductively coding 164 essays using pre-determined codes including MM, objective threat associated with the event, and content of both the stressful events and their impact (e.g., family, academic, race-related) for aim 1. The second step will include inductively coding the subset of essays in which participants engaged in MM (n = 47) to explore themes and patterns across the essays for aims 2 and 3. For the first step of deductive coding, intraclass correlations (ICCs) across two rounds of coding (n=73 essays) revealed moderate to good interrater reliability in identifying MM (ICC = .73 [round 1] and .89 [round 2]), and objective threat of the stressful event (ICC= .86 [round 1] and .74 [round 2]; Koo & Li, 2015). Preliminary results for aim 1 showed that of the 47 participants who engaged in MM, 13 described a mild stressful event (28%), 24 a moderate stressful event (51%), 9 a severe stressful event (19%), and 1 participant did not describe a stressful event (2%). Additionally, the most endorsed type of stressful event was related to family (n = 28; 60%), followed by interpersonal (e.g., peers and romantic; n = 22; 47%), academics (n = 21; 45%), and structural disadvantage (e.g., race, financial; n = 3; 6%). Examining the full sample, only stress content related to academics was associated with MM, χ²(3) = 9.33, p = .025. These findings suggest that the majority of participants engaging in MM wrote about moderately stressful events and MM was related to academic stressors. The remaining results will provide further information on how and what MM is achieved. Overall, these findings will contribute to a nuanced understanding of MM as a process as racially minoritized youth reflect on stressful life experiences. These findings can inform the development of positive psychology interventions for academically resilient youth navigating life challenges.