Judicial Resiliency
129
Coping Mechanisms Coping was defined by Snyder (1999) as a ―response aimed at diminishing the physical, emotional, and psychological burden that is linked to stressful life events and daily hassles‖ (p. 5). As coping is defined here and in the psychological literature, the concept encompasses a wide range of problem solving behaviors. Simply, through the coping process individuals are able to survive and adapt to life‘s many challenges through problem solving behaviors. The findings indicated that Judge Jones possesses several coping strategies that he uses to diminish the psychological, physical and emotional burden that is linked to stressful events and daily hassles in the courtroom. Anticipatory Coping. One of the skills that he used most effectively in the Ridgway case was anticipatory or proactive coping (Aspinwall & Taylor, 1997; Folkman & Lazarus, 1985; Greenglass, 2002). According to Greenglass (2002), proactive coping has three qualities: 1) it integrates planning and preventative strategies with proactive self-regulatory goal attainment; 2) it integrates goal attainment with identification and utilization of social resources; and 3) it utilizes proactive emotional coping for self-regulatory goal attainment. (pp. 7-8) The findings of this study suggested that Judge Jones anticipated many of the challenges and potential hazards that might arise during the Ridgway sentencing hearing and engaged in proactive strategies to mitigate potential problems. Conducting a dress rehearsal with staff and security in preparation for the hearing is an example of integrative planning and preventative strategies. Taking a moment of silence and