Communal Coping and Self-Care in Black and White Individuals Living with Type 2 Diabetes

ABSTRACT

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is both prevalent and profoundly impactful, and how people cope with the illness is related to a variety of individual and relational outcomes. The goal of this investigation was to test the logic of the recently extended Theoretical Model of Communal Coping (TMCC), a communication theory that argues that race (in this study, Black and White) moderates the relationship between communal coping and disease-related outcomes (i.e., glucose, diet, and exercise self-care). In general, survey data from 348 participants (n = 224 Black participants, n = 124 White participants) revealed that although communal coping was directly and positively related to self-care, the relationship between communal coping and self-care was stronger for Black participants than White participants. The results of the study have implications for the TMCC and for researchers, families managing type 2 diabetes, and healthcare practitioners.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Jacob Frankovich and the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback on this manuscript.

Disclosure of potential conflict of interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. To participate in the study, individuals self-identified as Black or African American. Consistent with recommendations from the American Psychological Association (2020), we use the term Black throughout the manuscript.

2. We recognize that culture and race are different constructs. When talking about arguments in the TMCC, we retain the language about culture to be consistent with the theory.

3. Though race is a multidimensional construct that is conceptualized in many different ways, in this study, we specifically examine Black and White individuals, while acknowledging that race is not binary. All participants self-identified as either Black/African American or as White, consistent with guidelines from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (1997).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by a Faculty Research Grant awarded by the Office of Research and Economic Development at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.