DQ 1 :How do coping strategies help clients prevent relapse?
Naming two coping strategies takes a sentence; 'justify their effectiveness' is the whole grade. With a 150-word floor and two strategies to defend, you have roughly sixty words each — which forces evidence rather than description.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · July 26, 2026
What is PCN-501 Week 8 DQ 1 actually asking?
The question has two clauses and they are not equally weighted. 'Present two examples' is recall and costs you a sentence. 'Justify their effectiveness' is an evidence claim, and it is where the marks are. The difference matters most because the class requires a minimum of 150 words and at least two references, one peer-reviewed — so after you have stated the mechanism and named two strategies, you have roughly sixty words to defend each. That budget does not permit description. It permits a claim, a citation, and an outcome.
The first clause also has a specific answer in this field rather than a general one, and reaching for the general answer is the most common way to lose depth. In Marlatt's relapse prevention model the chain is explicit: a client encounters a high-risk situation; if they execute an effective coping response, self-efficacy rises and the probability of relapse falls; if they do not, self-efficacy drops, positive expectancies about the substance become more persuasive, and a lapse becomes likely. That sequence is the answer to 'how do coping strategies help'. Writing that coping strategies 'help clients manage stress and triggers' is true of coping in any context and skips the model the course is teaching.
There is a second place coping operates that stronger posts include: after a lapse. The model distinguishes a lapse — a single episode of use — from a relapse, and what determines whether one becomes the other is partly how the client interprets it. When a lapse is read as proof of personal failure, the resulting guilt and loss of control make continued use more likely. Coping strategies therefore have two jobs: preventing the lapse, and preventing the lapse from escalating. Naming both shows you understand relapse as a process rather than an event.
On the choice of examples, pick two that differ in kind. The model separates behavioural coping from cognitive coping, so pairing one of each — a behavioural strategy such as urge surfing or a rehearsed exit plan for a high-risk setting, alongside a cognitive strategy such as restructuring the beliefs that follow a lapse — demonstrates range and, practically, makes the two justifications easier to keep distinct. Two behavioural strategies is one example given twice, and the second justification tends to repeat the first.
Finally, be careful not to substitute avoidance for coping. Removing yourself from every high-risk situation is stimulus control, a real and useful technique, but it works by preventing exposure rather than by building a response to it. If you offer it, say which of the two it is.
Likely learning objectives
- State the relapse mechanism specifically — high-risk situation, coping response, self-efficacy, outcome expectancies — rather than describing coping in general terms.
- Distinguish a lapse from a relapse and explain what determines whether one becomes the other, which is likely what separates a competent post from a strong one.
- Select two strategies that differ in kind, since the assessor is likely looking for range rather than two instances of the same mechanism.
- Justify effectiveness with outcome evidence rather than plausibility, which the requirement for a peer-reviewed reference appears designed to enforce.
- Write to a tight word budget in which most of the space is spent on justification, not on describing what each strategy involves.
Assignment instructions
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
PCN 501 Grand Canyon Week 8 Discussion 1 DQ 1 :How do coping strategies help clients prevent relapse? How do coping strategies help clients prevent relapse? Present two examples of coping strategies and justify their effectiveness
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
Important information for writing discussion questions and participation Hi Class, Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts. Contact me if you have any questions. Important information on Writing a Discussion Question Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references) There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article. Include in-text citations in your response Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information Follow APA-7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week. Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references) Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count. Follow APA 7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points. Here are some helpful links Student paper example Citing Sources The Writing Center is a great resource Welcome to class Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to. I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you. Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations. Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements. Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week. I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course! PCN 501 Grand Canyon Week 8 Discussion 1 Grading Rubric Guidelines Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Scholarliness Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions. Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion. Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic. Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions. Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0 Application of Course Knowledge – Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources; Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life. Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources. Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson. Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post. Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life Performance Category 5 4 3 2 0 Interactive Dialogue Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days. (5 points possible per graded thread) Exceeds minimum post requirements Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days. Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days Replies to a question posed by a peer Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week. Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days. The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty Has only one post for the week Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments Does not post to the thread No connections are made to the topic Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point Grammar, Syntax, APA Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted. Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing. The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition 2-3 errors in APA format. Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors. Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication. 4-5 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is somewhat focused. 6-7 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand. 8-10 errors in APA format. Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand. Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format. Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors. Writing style does not facilitate communication. The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor 0 points lost -5 points lost Total Participation Requirements per discussion thread The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days Early Participation Requirement per discussion thread The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT. });
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01Answer how coping strategies help clients prevent relapse.
- 02Present two examples of coping strategies.
- 03Justify the effectiveness of each.
- 04Class policy: minimum 150 words, not counting the reference list.
- 05Class policy: at least TWO references, one of which must be a peer-reviewed professional journal article.
- 06Class policy: in-text citations required; no direct quotes — summarise and paraphrase instead.
- 07Class policy: APA 7th edition.
- 08Class policy: six substantive replies per week across at least three days, each at least 75 words with a citation — graded separately from this post.
How do you structure the coping-strategies post?
The mechanism, stated in the model's terms
Open with the causal chain rather than a definition: high-risk situation, coping response executed or not, resulting shift in self-efficacy, and the effect on outcome expectancies and lapse probability.
What the assessor is likely looking for
That the answer uses the relapse prevention model rather than a general account of coping. This opening is what signals whether the week's reading was absorbed.
Strategy one — a behavioural coping response
Name a concrete behavioural strategy, state the point in the chain at which it acts, and cite outcome evidence for it rather than describing the technique step by step.
What the assessor is likely looking for
That the justification is evidential. A description of how the technique is performed is not a justification of whether it works.
Strategy two — a cognitive coping response
Name a cognitive strategy of a different kind, ideally one acting after a lapse rather than before it, and justify it with its own evidence so the second half does not restate the first.
What the assessor is likely looking for
That the two strategies are genuinely distinct in mechanism. Two variations on the same idea leave the second justification with nothing new to claim.
Coping after a lapse, and the limits of the claim
Close by noting that coping operates both before a lapse and in its aftermath, and acknowledge briefly where the evidence is mixed or where a strategy works better for some clients than others.
What the assessor is likely looking for
That relapse is treated as a process with more than one intervention point, and that effectiveness is claimed proportionately rather than absolutely.
Which evidence justifies each coping strategy?
Recommended databases
- PubMed / PubMed Central
- PsycINFO
- NIAAA and NIDA publications
- Cochrane Library
Search sequence
- 1.Read the Larimer, Palmer and Marlatt overview first so the mechanism paragraph is written in the model's own vocabulary — high-risk situation, coping response, self-efficacy, abstinence violation effect.
- 2.Choose your two strategies only after you know which ones have trial evidence you can cite in one sentence; picking the strategy first and hunting for support afterwards is what produces unjustifiable claims.
- 3.For the peer-reviewed requirement, prefer a randomised trial or systematic review reporting substance-use outcomes over a descriptive article about the technique.
- 4.Check whether the evidence you found concerns the same population and substance you are discussing, and say so if it does not.
- 5.Paraphrase throughout — the class policy prohibits direct quotes and deducts points for them.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Relapse Prevention: An Overview of Marlatt's Cognitive-Behavioral Model
Alcohol Research & Health (NIAAA), via PubMed Central · 1999
The source for the mechanism paragraph: high-risk situations, coping skills, self-efficacy, outcome expectancies and the abstinence violation effect, plus the distinction between specific and global intervention strategies. Use it for the model, not as evidence that any particular strategy works.
Relative efficacy of mindfulness-based relapse prevention, standard relapse prevention, and treatment as usual for substance use disorders: a randomized clinical trial
JAMA Psychiatry, via PubMed · 2014
Satisfies the peer-reviewed requirement and supplies genuine outcome evidence for a mindfulness-based coping strategy against both standard relapse prevention and treatment as usual. This is the kind of source that turns a plausibility claim into a justification.
Relapse prevention for addictive behaviors
Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy · 2011
Open-access overview of relapse determinants and the intervention strategies built on them. Useful for locating where a chosen strategy sits in the chain, and for the vocabulary distinguishing coping from stimulus control and lifestyle balance.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Spending the post describing what each technique involves. The question asks you to justify effectiveness, and a step-by-step account of how to do deep breathing is not evidence that it prevents relapse.
- Answering 'how do coping strategies help' generically — that they reduce stress or manage triggers. That is true of coping in any context and bypasses the high-risk-situation and self-efficacy chain the course is teaching.
- Choosing two strategies of the same kind. Two behavioural techniques give the second justification nothing new to claim, and the repetition is visible in a 150-word post.
- Treating a lapse and a relapse as the same event. The distinction, and the role of how a client interprets a lapse, is one of the model's central contributions.
- Offering avoidance of high-risk situations as a coping strategy without naming it as stimulus control. It prevents exposure rather than building a response, which is a different mechanism.
- Citing a descriptive article about a technique to satisfy the peer-reviewed requirement. A trial or systematic review reporting substance-use outcomes is what actually justifies effectiveness.
- Using direct quotes. The class policy prohibits them outright and deducts points, so every source has to be paraphrased.
- Counting the reference list toward the 150 words, which the policy explicitly excludes.
Submission checklist
- At least 150 words excluding references, with most of the length spent on justification rather than description.
- The mechanism stated in the model's terms — high-risk situation, coping response, self-efficacy, outcome expectancies.
- Exactly two strategies, differing in kind rather than in detail.
- Each strategy carries its own outcome evidence and its own citation.
- The lapse-versus-relapse distinction appears at least once.
- At least two references, one of them a peer-reviewed journal article.
- In-text citations present throughout, APA 7th edition, and no direct quotes anywhere.
- Any limit on the evidence — different population, different substance, mixed findings — acknowledged rather than smoothed over.
- Six substantive replies planned across at least three days, each 75+ words with a citation.
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.