Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
35
© The Author(s) 2021
G. Haugan, M. Eriksson (eds.), Health Promotion in Health Care – Vital Theories and Research,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63135-2_4
Sense ofCoherence
UnniKarinMoksnes
Abstract
This chapter introduces the concept of sense
of coherence which is a core concept in the
salutogenic model dened by Aron
Antonovsky. The salutogenic model posits
that sense of coherence is a global orientation,
where life is understood as more or less com-
prehensible, meaningful, and manageable. A
strong sense of coherence helps the individual
to mobilize resources to cope with stressors
and manage tension successfully with the help
of identication and use of generalized and
specic resistance resources. Through this
mechanism, the sense of coherence helps
determine one’s movement on the health ease/
dis-ease continuum. Antonovsky developed an
instrument named Orientation to Life
Questionnaire to measure the sense of coher-
ence which exists in two original versions: a
29-item and a 13-item version. This chapter
presents the measurement of the sense of
coherence and the validity and reliability of
the 13-item scale. It gives a brief overview of
empirical research of the role of sense of
coherence in association with mental health
and quality of life and also on sense of coher-
ence in different patient groups including
nursing home residents, patients with coro-
nary heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and men-
tal health problems. It also briey discusses
the implications of using salutogenesis in
health care services and the importance of
implementing this perspective in meeting with
different patient groups. The salutogenic
approach may promote a healthy orientation
toward helping the patient to cope with every-
day stressors and integrate the effort regarding
how to help the patient manage to live with
disease and illness and promote quality of life.
Keywords
SOC · Resistance resources · Salutogenesis
Health promotion · Nursing
4.1 Introduction
Aron Antonovsky introduced the key concept of
sense of coherence as part of the salutogenic
model in the book Health, Stress and Coping in
1979. Salutogenesis focuses on what are the
sources for people’s resources and capacity to
U. K. Moksnes (*)
Department of Public Health and Nursing,
NTNU Norwegian University of Science
andTechnology, Trondheim, Norway
NTNU-Center for Health Promotion Research,
Trondheim, Norway
Faculty of Nursing and Health Science,
Nord University, Levanger, Norway
e-mail: unni.moksnes@ntnu.no
4
36
create health as distinct from, and yet a comple-
mentary perspective to pathogenesis, focusing
on risk for disease, which traditionally had been
the leading focus in research [1, 2]. One of
Antonovsky’s deviations from pathogenesis was
to reject the dichotomization into categories of
sick or well and instead understand health as an
ease/dis-ease continuum; a horizontal line
between total absence of health (H−) and total
health (H+) [3] (Fig.4.1). We are all more or less
ill or well at any given point in time and conse-
quently positioned on different places on this
health continuum during the life course. The
important point is to focus on what moves an
individual toward the ease-pole of the contin-
uum, regardless of where he/she was initially
located with a focus on what promotes health,
well- being, and quality of life. The interesting
question stated by Antonovsky was therefore
what explains movement toward the health end
of the ease/dis-ease-continuum? His answer to
this salutogenic question was formulated in
terms of sense of coherence (SOC) and general-
ized resistance resources (GRR) and specic
resistance resources (SRR) [4, 5]. The saluto-
genic theory posits that life experiences shape
the SOC.This capacity is a prerequisite for peo-
ples’ ability to move in the positive direction on
the health continuum and is a combination of
peoples’ ability to assess and understand the sit-
uation they are in, to nd a meaning to move in a
health-promoting direction, and also having the
capacity to do so [4, 5].
When Antonovsky introduced salutogenesis,
it was originally aimed to be a stress theory.
Antonovsky saw stress as a natural and inevita-
ble part of life, assuming that life was challeng-
ing and health being continuously threatened by
ubiquitous stressors [1, 2, 6]. Stressors place a
load on us, which causes tension. However, ten-
sion and strain are considered as potentially
health promoting, rather than as inevitably
health damaging, depending on the individual
ability to identify and use GRRs to cope ade-
quately with stressors. Antonovsky was inter-
ested in the explanation for why some people,
regardless of major stressful situations, manage
to stay healthy, and live good lives, while others
do not [7]. This may involve major life events
such as experience of acute and serious illness,
changes in the family, or changes in the work-
place. The frequency, intensity, and duration of
the stressor(s) are all factors that affect the indi-
vidual’s ability to cope adequately. Three poten-
tial reactions and outcomes of stress are (1)
being neutral against the stressors, (2) being
able to manage stress for the movement toward
the health end, and (3) being unable to manage
stress which leads to a breakdown expressed in
terms of diseases and death [2] (see Fig. 4.1).
Under the inuence of stressors, the individual
experiences tension and is constantly challenged
to adapt to the stressor and to identify and use
personal and environmental GRRs to cope ade-
quately with the stressor(s). The individual’s
ability to identify and use GRRs affects the indi-
vidual’s ability to cope adequately with the
stressor, which further affects health, that is,
where the individual is positioned on the ease/
dis-ease continuum [4, 5].
Antonovsky referred to the ability to compre-
hend the whole situation, and the capacity to
identify and use the resources available, as the
SOC [1, 3]. As a medical sociologist, Antonovsky
saw the individual in continuous interaction with
the context and daily life as something in con-
stant change. For the individual, the challenge is
to manage the stimuli and nd strategies and
resources available for coping with the changes
in everyday life and manage complexity.
Complexity may lead to conicts but also offers
opportunities for different and exible choices,
possibilities for adapting to change. It becomes
STRESSOR
TENSION
PATHOGENESIS
SALUT
OGENESIS
BREAKDOWN
H
–H+
Fig. 4.1 The ease/dis-ease continuum. (Published with
permission from Folkhälsan Research Center, Helsinki,
Lindström & Eriksson [3])
U. K. Moksnes
37
vital how the individual can manage this chaos.
SOC is the term Antonovsky introduced as an
opportunity to manage and adapt to life’s chaos.
The primary focus is on the dynamic interaction
between health promoting factors and stressors in
human life and how people can move to the
healthier end of the ease/dis-ease continuum.
SOC is proposed to be a signicant variable in
affecting this movement [2, 5].
4.2 The Concept ofSense
ofCoherence
The concept sense of coherence (SOC) is dened
as “a global orientation that expresses the extent
to which one has a pervasive, enduring though
dynamic feeling of condence that 1) the stimuli
deriving from one’s internal and external envi-
ronments in the course of living are structured,
predictable, and explicable, 2) the resources are
available to one to meet the demands posed by
these stimuli; and 3) these demands are chal-
lenges, worthy of investment and engagement”
([2], p. 19). These three components, termed
comprehensibility, manageability, and meaning-
fulness are thought to be highly interrelated but
separable, forming the SOC (Fig. 4.2).
Comprehensibility is the cognitive component
and refers to the degree to which the individual
sense that information that concerns themselves,
the social environment, and the context is not
only understandable but also ordered, structured,
and consistent. However, perceiving events as
comprehensible does not mean that they are com-
pletely predictable or without difculty; the point
is that stimuli experienced are explicable and
logic. Manageability is the “instrumental” com-
ponent and refers to the extent to which individu-
als perceive that available resources are at their
disposal and sufcient to adequately cope with
the demands. Meaningfulness is the motivational
component and refers to the extent to which indi-
viduals feel that certain areas of life are worthy of
time, effort, personal involvement, and commit-
ment [2, 3, 6]. All the three dimensions interact
with each other. According to Antonovsky, the
most important component is meaningfulness,
which he thought was the driving force in life.
When the individual perceives at least some of
life’s problems and demands as worthy of com-
mitment and engagement, that also gives a greater
sense of the two components of comprehensibil-
ity and manageability as well. However, this
statement has been discussed. In a study of myo-
cardial infarction patients, this hypothesis was
rejected, showing that the dimension of compre-
hensibility was more important than meaningful-
ness for changes in SOC [8].
The three components in the SOC concept are
strongly connected and reect an individual
resource and life orientation that enables the indi-
vidual to reect on its external and internal
resources in order to cope with stressors and the
ability to resolve tension in a health-promoting
way [6]. Further, the life orientation of SOC is a
way of thinking, being, and acting as a human
being, which gives direction in life. The SOC
concept also reects a person’s view of life and
capacity to respond to stressful situations, which
leads people to identify and mobilize the GRR at
disposal [1, 2, 6]. Antonovsky saw the individual
in interaction with the context. However,
Antonovsky stressed that the salutogenic theory
Sense of Coherence
Comprehensibility Managebility Meaningfulness
Fig. 4.2 Dimensionality
of the construct of sense
of coherence
4 Sense ofCoherence
38
and its key concept, SOC, also can be applied at
a collective level, and not only with a focus on the
individual level [6].
4.3 Generalized Resistance
Resources (GRRs)
Along with the concept of SOC, a key concept in
the salutogenic theory/model is the role of gener-
alized and specic resistance resources [1, 2],
which are seen as important prerequisites for the
development of SOC.Antonovsky promoted that
generalized resistance resources (GRR) and spe-
cic resistance resources (SRR) are not exchange-
able concepts. Others seem to agree that the
distinction is not particularly important [9]. As
though most focus has been given to the role of
GRR in the literature, that will also be the focus
in this chapter.
Overall, the term generalized resistance
resources (GRR) was established by Antonovsky
[1, 2] and constitutes the assets and characteris-
tics of a person, a group, or a community that
facilitate the individual’s abilities to cope effec-
tively with stressors and that contribute to the
development of the individual’s level of SOC [2].
Consequently, higher levels of GRRs are associ-
ated with stronger SOC.Resources fall into three
basic (but interrelated) domains: those that
enhance comprehensibility, those that enhance
manageability, and those that enhance meaning-
fulness. Because the person and the environment
will always interact, it is not possible to identify
all possible GRRs. Therefore, Antonovsky for-
mulated the following denition that provides a
criterion to identify GRRs: “every characteriza-
tion of a person, group or environment that pro-
motes effective management of tension” ([1],
p.99). Resistance resources may exist at the indi-
vidual, the group, in the subculture, and at the
whole society levels ([1], p.103). Antonovsky’s
[1, 2] illustration of GRR is given in Fig.4.3, and
such resources may include the following factors:
(1) physical and genetic (strong physic, strong
immune system, genetic strength); (2) material
resources (e.g., money, accommodation, food);
(3) cognitive and emotional (knowledge, intelli-
gence, adaptive strategies for coping, emotional
intelligence); (4) ego identity (positive percep-
tion of self); (5) valuative and attitudinal (coping
strategies characterized by rationality, exibility
foresight); (6) interpersonal-relational (attach-
ment, social support from friends and family); (7)
macro sociocultural aspects (culture, shared val-
ues in society).
The initial GRR resources [1] may be per-
ceived as manifested within the life experiences.
Four types of life experiences are assumed to
contribute to the SOC developmental process
during the course of growing up: consistency,
load balance, participation in shaping outcomes,
and emotional closeness [10]. Experiences of
consistency in an individual’s life provide the
Generalised
Resistance
Resources (GRR)
physical
biochemical
material
cognitive
emotional
values
interpersonal
relational
macrosociocultural
individual
primary
group
subculture
society
that is
effective in
a wide range of
stressors
characteristic of an
and thus preventing tension from being transformed into stress
1. avoiding
or
2. combating
Fig. 4.3 Illustration of
generalized resistance
resources (Source:
Antonovsky, 1979 [1],
p.103)
U. K. Moksnes
39
basis for the comprehensibility component of the
SOC [4, 10, 11]. Consistency refers to the extent
to which messages were clear and that there were
order and structure from experienced stimuli
rather than chaos. The second life experience,
load balance, refers to the extent to which one
experienced overload or underload in the balance
between the demands experienced and one’s
resources to cope. Load balance is important for
the manageability component of SOC.The third
life experience including participation in shaping
outcomes refers to the extent to which the indi-
vidual perceives autonomy, has impact in decid-
ing her/his fate, and is not under pressure of
others. Participation in shaping outcomes pro-
vides the basis for the meaningfulness compo-
nent. The fourth life experience, emotional
closeness, refers to the extent to which one feel
consistent emotional bonds and a sense of belong-
ing in social groups of which one was a member
[10, 11]. A person with a strong SOC is able to
mobilize GRRs to promote effective coping. This
resolves tension in a health-promoting manner
and leads toward the salutary health end of the
health ease/dis-ease continuum [6]. SOC and dif-
ferent GRRs work together in a mutual interplay.
The more GRRs people are conscious of, able to
mobilize and make use of, the stronger SOC.A
stronger SOC will in turn help people mobilize
more of their resources, leading to better health
and well-being.
Antonovsky divided resistance resources into
GRR, which are resources that have wide-rang-
ing utility to facilitate effective salutary tension
management, while SRRs have situation-specic
utility in particular situations of tension [1]. As
described by Mittelmark etal. [9], the relation-
ship between GRR and SRR is that via the SOC,
the GRRs enable one to recognize, pick up, and
use SRR in ways that keep tension from turning
into debilitating stress. For example, Sullivan
[12] makes a differentiation, stating that nursing
is a GRR, while the nurse providing help with a
particular problem is an SRR.Hence, supportive
environments may include both GRR and SRR,
but they have distinctions in reference to specic-
ity. When being confronted with a special
stressor, a strong SOC enhances one’s ability to
recognize and activate the most appropriate SRR
from those that may be available. A study investi-
gating the role of different SRRs and GRRs in
informal caregivers originating from themselves
and their care recipients as dyads showed the
necessity of living in a well-functioning relation-
ship which enabled dyads to solve challenges
through cooperation and use of SRRs/GRRs
(e.g., mutual understanding of the situation, good
communicative skills, and enjoying togetherness)
[13]. These resistance resources were important
to be able to resolve the challenges they encoun-
tered, that is, through cooperation and use of their
specic dyadic tension management. The study
suggests that good past and present relationships
wherein the dyad can use SRRs/GRRs might
facilitate the dyad’s adaptation to the caregiving
situation [13].
4.4 Assessment ofSense
ofCoherence
Antonovsky developed the Orientation to Life
Questionnaire (OLQ) to operationalize SOC.The
questionnaire exists in two forms: a long version
consisting of 29 items and a short 13-item ver-
sion [2]. The OLQ has been translated in several
languages and seems to be a cross-culturally
valid, reliable, and feasible instrument, especially
in adult samples [3, 7].
According to Antonovsky [2, 7], the OLQ
comprises one general factor of SOC with three
correlated components of comprehensibility (ve
items), manageability (four items), and meaning-
fulness (four items). However, previous valida-
tion studies have shown that the factor structure
of the scale is complex and seems to measure a
multidimensional rather than a one-dimensional
construct [3, 7]. Following from that, Antonovsky
maintained that on theoretical grounds, one
should avoid lifting out individual dimensions in
order to examine them separately. Studies inves-
tigating the factor structure of the 13-item OLQ
based on exploratory and conrmatory
approaches in adult and older populations have
shown support for a three-factor structure [14–
17], a second-order three-factor structure [14,
4 Sense ofCoherence
40
18–20], and a one-factor structure [21].
Accordingly, the construct validity of the OLQ-
13 does not seem to be clear in reference to that
different factor structures are evident in different
populations. It may also be a question whether
the items included in the instrument adequately
represent the construct of SOC and that there
may be variations in how the items are under-
stood across different cultures and age groups.
Validations of the factor structure in adolescent
populations are less investigated, but previous
studies have found support for a one-factor struc-
ture in a sample of Swedish adolescents [22] and
three-factor structure in Norwegian adolescents
[23]. While many translations of the OLQ and the
research that has used it have given condence
that the SOC construct is measurable, the sub-
stance of the SOC construct needs to be further
explored. This may include using the salutogenic
model and qualitative methods investigating the
core of the SOC components of comprehensibil-
ity, manageability, and meaningfulness [3].
4.5 Sense ofCoherence
inAssociation withHealth
andQuality ofLife
A strong SOC is associated with good health,
especially mental health and quality of life in dif-
ferent groups and populations [24–27]. Further, a
strong SOC is associated with positive perceived
health [24, 28] and is found to be inversely and
strongly related to psychological problems like
symptoms of anxiety and depression [24]. SOC is
positively related to other health resources, such
as optimism, hardiness, resilience, and coping.
Individuals with a strong SOC also show more
positive health behavior, with less use of alcohol,
being a non-smoker, better oral health care [29–
31] and more healthy food choice [32]. The SOC
construct has been questioned regarding the weak
relationship with physical health contrary to
mental health [3, 33, 34]. The weak correlation to
physical health may not be surprising since SOC
mainly focuses on the mental, social, and spiri-
tual ability to manage life [35]. The SOC con-
struct has also been criticized for being too close
to the construct of mental health, suggesting they
overlap [35]. The lack of evidence of the stability
of SOC over time has also been criticized.
Antonovsky [2] claimed that SOC like personal-
ity traits develops during childhood and early
adulthood and becomes stabilized in the period
of early adulthood. The SOC seems to be rela-
tively stable over time, at least for people with an
initial strong SOC [27, 36]. However, the SOC
seems to be stronger with age and continues to
develop over the whole life span [3, 27].
4.6 Sense ofCoherence
andHealth inDierent
Patient Groups
4.6.1 Nursing Home Residents
Long term care facilities, including nursing
homes, provide most institutional care for older
people in many western countries. Moving to a
nursing home results from numerous losses, ill-
nesses, disabilities, loss of functions and social
relations, and approaching mortality; all of which
increase an individual’s vulnerability and dis-
tress. In particular, loneliness and depression are
identied as risks to the emotional and social
well-being of older people [37, 38]. Thus, an
important core function of health care profes-
sionals is to support everyday living, health, well-
being, and quality of life [39]. Studies that have
investigated the role of SOC in nursing home
residents have found support for that SOC is an
important component of functioning in old age.
SOC has been shown to be associated to better
health-related quality of life among nursing home
residents [40, 41]. Stronger SOC also relates to
lower emotional and social loneliness among
nursing home residents [37, 42]. The challenge
for health professionals is to help residents to
reduce mental health problems and emotional
and social loneliness and to strengthen their
SOC. Promoting respectful and present nurse–
patient interaction, acknowledging the individual
as a person, might be a crucial resource in rela-
tion to nursing home patients’ health and
well-being.
U. K. Moksnes
41
4.6.2 Coronary Heart Disease (CHD)
Studies on SOC in coronary heart disease (CHD)
patients is important in reference to their ability
to cope with their life situation. A study of
Bergman etal. [43] showed that the level of SOC
seems to be relatively stable among patients who
had suffered from myocardial infarction;
although there were signicant individual varia-
tions over the years. A longitudinal study of
Silarova et al. [44] have shown that SOC is a
predictor of mental and physical health-related
quality of life of patients with CHD at 12- to
28-month follow-up and in female myocardial
infarction survivors [45]. Stronger SOC has been
shown to be associated with better health behav-
ior related to physical activity [8, 46] and quality
of life in patients after myocardial infarction [8,
47]. A study of Bergman etal. [43] which inves-
tigated the components of SOC in myocardial
patients showed that comprehensibility was the
most important component of SOC changes for
2years after a myocardial infarction. Coping has
been emphasized as an important factor in
explaining differences between patients’ percep-
tions of their life situations when affected by a
life-threatening disease. Although SOC does not
refer to a specic type of coping strategy, it com-
prises factors that may be regarded as a basis for
successful coping with stressors. Hence, a posi-
tive outcome from a stressor is primarily depen-
dent on successful management of the stressor
and the presence of strong SOC. Within the
dimensions of a strong SOC, critically ill patients
may be able to show better ability to cope and to
manage their lives after discharge from hospital
by supporting their SOC.
4.6.3 Diabetes
The prevalence of diabetes is rapidly increasing;
this is the case especially for type 2 diabetes.
Given that type 2 diabetes is partly preventable, it
is important to identify not only physical and
health behavioral risk factors but also psycho-
logical risk factors that can promote coping and
good health. Previous studies have shown that a
strong SOC has been associated with more posi-
tive health behavior change [48] related to physi-
cal activity and food choices, which are factors
relevant in the development of type 2 diabetes.
Antonovsky did not use the concept “health
behavior” but used a related concept “a health
orientation,” that served as a GRR. Combined
with other GRRs, a healthy orientation serves as
a prerequisite for the development of a strong
SOC [2]. Study ndings have shown that patients
with type 2 diabetes report lower SOC than a
control group of patients without diabetes, and
especially men [49]. The relationship between
SOC and the incidence of diabetes was prospec-
tively studied among Finnish male employees
(5827 at baseline) [50], showing that a weak SOC
was associated with a 46% higher risk of diabetes
(≤50 years of entry). This association was sig-
nicant, independent of age, education, marital
status, psychological distress, self-rated health,
smoking status, binge drinking, and physical
activity. Studies have also shown that patients
with type 1 diabetes that report stronger SOC
also show better metabolic control than those
with weaker SOC, through adherence to self-care
behaviors related to food choices and physical
activity [51, 52].
4.6.4 Cancer
For most people, receiving a cancer diagnosis
often causes severe distress. Therefore, working
on supporting the patient’s coping resources in
order to promote positive psychological adjust-
ment is important. The concept of SOC has been
studied in individuals with various forms of can-
cer and moreover, in survivors of various forms
of cancer, SOC is a strong predictor of quality of
life [53, 54] and fewer symptoms of anxiety and
depression [55]. In breast cancer patients, reports
of stronger SOC relate to higher quality of life
[53, 54, 56] through better emotional functioning
and less fatigue and pain [53]. Further, stronger
SOC is associated with less report of stress, dis-
tress [57, 58], and more positive coping strategies
4 Sense ofCoherence
42
such as direct action and relaxation [54].
However, cancer patients are reported to score
lower on SOC than the general population [56].
4.6.5 Mental Health
According to WHO, depression is one of the
leading causes of disease burden in terms of dis-
ability. Although some people only suffer a sin-
gle episode of depression, the high prevalence
together with the associated impairment of func-
tioning and socioeconomic consequences under-
scores the need to understand this illness fully.
The experience of having a serious illness such as
depression affects the individual’s quality of life
and requires signicant adaptation by the patient
and his/her family in order to cope. Research
shows the signicance of the salutogenic
approach in mental health promotion, including
various mental health problems [59]. One buffer-
ing component may be the individual’s percep-
tion of SOC.In a 4-year and a 1-year follow-up
study of people with major depression, SOC was
shown to increase signicantly as patients recov-
ered after therapy [60, 61]. SOC is also found to
predict life satisfaction in people with chronic
mental health problems [62], and stronger SOC is
found to be associated with reduced risk of psy-
chiatric disorders during a long time period [63].
4.7 Implications forPractice
The WHO Ottawa Charter for health promo-
tion [64] states that health is created and lived
by people within the settings of their everyday
life where they learn, work, play, and love.
Salutogenesis has been applied to guide health
promotion research and practice in various set-
tings, however, mainly in everyday life set-
tings. A central question is therefore what
implications salutogenesis and related con-
cepts have for practice in the health care
setting?
With advances in medical technology and
improvement in the living standard globally, the
life expectancy of people is increasing worldwide
[65]. Meanwhile, we also see an increasing prev-
alence of non-communicable diseases and
chronic illnesses in the population [66]. With
more advanced medical technology and medical
treatment, more people survive from serious dis-
eases but that also leads to that more people will
have to learn to live with different chronic impair-
ments in their everyday life. A new life situation
is demanding and requires adaptation in many
life areas for the individual. The preferences, or
what is evaluated as valuable in life changes in
meeting with illness, therefore, the experience of
quality of life is a highly individual matter. At the
same time, most people have a unique ability to
adapt to and cope with inevitable life situations,
and our expectations change according to life’s
realities. Here, health care personnel have a great
responsibility in identifying possibilities for
change and help the patient to cope with a new
life situation. These aspects also challenge the
health care sector’s provision of efcient primary
health care and long-term care, where more
responsibility is given to the health care sector in
the community/municipality.
The salutogenic perspective can be used to
guide health promotion interventions in health
care practice and to (re)orient health care practice
[67]. The health care sector is generally a chal-
lenging area for applying salutogenesis and to
reorient in a health-promoting direction, as the
focus is and should be disease treatment. The
reorientation of the health care services in a
health-promoting direction therefore seems to be
the least systematically developed, implemented,
and evaluated key action of the ve action areas
outlined in the Ottawa Charter. The goal of
implementing the salutogenic perspective is
therefore that salutogenesis can be a complemen-
tary perspective to the pathogenic perspective
where these perspectives interact in the planning
and implementation of actions. In meeting with
all patient groups, and especially with patients
living with chronic diseases, health professionals
need to focus on the patient’s salutary resources
as well as focusing on how to diminish and reduc-
ing risk factors. Further, it is important that the
individual is seen in holistic terms, interacting
with his/her daily life context. One of the central
aspects implies promoting a more active patient
role, where the health care professionals empower
U. K. Moksnes
43
the patient to activate the use of knowledge and
clarication of resources and needs in the plan-
ning of health care needed. An important role of
health professionals is to identify the patient’s
experiences and prerequisites and help the patient
to identify and activate resistance resources, in
order to promote coping with everyday life chal-
lenges. This challenges the health care person-
nel’s ability to work holistically with the patient’s
resources and needs and to see the patient as an
equal partner in the planning of health care. This
approach is important in order to integrate the
resources and efforts needed regarding how to
help the patient mange lives’ challenges and pro-
mote quality of life.
In reference to intervention work, using salu-
togenesis as a basis for providing health-
promoting interventions is found to be effective,
e.g., toward strengthening SOC in patients liv-
ing with long-term illness [68–70]. For instance,
in patients with severe mental disorders, a com-
bination of perspectives in order to provide
holistic nursing is found to be important; this
includes applying salutogenic knowledge about
living a good and meaningful life in addition to
knowledge anchored in the biomedically domi-
nated understanding of mental illness [70].
Consequently, mental health care services
should offer education programs with a comple-
mentary perspective on mental health, denoted
“salus education” [70]. This implies a shift in
practice to identify and build upon each indi-
vidual’s assets, strengths, and competence and
support the person in managing his or her condi-
tion in order to gain a meaningful, constructive
sense of being a part of a community [70]. The
focus is not only how to combat and survive dis-
ease, but to help and “educate” people to “swim
in the river of life.”
4.8 Conclusion
This chapter has given an introduction to saluto-
genesis and the concept of sense of coherence
(SOC) and generalized and specic resistance
resources (GRR/SRR). It has also presented empir-
ical research on assessment of SOC with use of the
Orientation to Life Questionnaire developed by
Antonovsky. The chapter has presented empirical
research on the central role of SOC as a personal
coping resource and life orientation in relation to
health and quality of life in different populations
and patient groups. Today, we can talk about salu-
togenesis more as a salutogenic umbrella and assets
apprach with many different concepts with saluto-
genic elements and dimensions besides SOC [35].
The application of salutogenesis as a perspective
guiding work in the health care settings seems to be
vital and important as a complementary approach
to the biomedical paradigm, since it is about imple-
menting salutogenesis into a territory which is still
predominantly dominated by the biomedical para-
digm. Salutogenic thinking also seems to have
good potential to be applied in health promoting
interventions, and in supporting health promoting
work in health care institutions for better everyday
practice and quality of life for patiens [67].
Take Home Messages
• Sense of coherence is an important concept
within salutogenesis and is considered as a
personal coping resources and life orientation,
where life is understood as more or less com-
prehensible, meaningful, and manageable.
• A strong sense of coherence helps the indi-
vidual to mobilize resources to cope with life
stressors and manage tension successfully
with help of identication and use of general-
ized and specic resistance resources.
• Antonovsky developed the 29-item and a
shorter 13-item version of the Orientation to
Life Questionnaire (OLQ) to measure the
sense of coherence.
• The OLQ scale has been translated in sev-
eral languages and seems to be a cross-cul-
turally valid and reliable instrument.
Criticism of the SOC concept covers the
multidimensionality of the concept. The
substance of the SOC construct needs to be
further explored.
• In health care, salutogenesis can be used to
guide health promotion interventions in health
care practice and/or to (re)orient health care
services into a more health-promoting
direction.
4 Sense ofCoherence
44
References
1. Antonovsky A. Health, stress and coping. San
Fransisco: Jossey-Bass; 1979.
2. Antonovsky A.Unraveling the mystery of health. How
people manage stress and stay well. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass; 1987.
3. Eriksson M, Mittelmark MB.The sense of coherence
and its measurement. In: Mittelmark M, et al., edi-
tors. The handbook of Salutogenesis. Cham: Springer;
2017.
4. Bauer GF, Roy M, Bakibinga P, Contu P, Downe S,
Eriksson M, etal. Future directions for the concept of
salutogenesis. Health Promot Int. 2020;35(2):187–95.
5. Mittelmark MB, Bauer GF. The meanings of
Salutogenesis. In: Mittelmark M, etal., editors. The
handbook of Salutogenesis. Cham: Springer; 2017.
6. Eriksson M.The sense of coherence in the Salutogenic
model of health. In: Mittelmark M, etal., editors. The
handbook of Salutogenesis. Cham: Springer; 2017.
7. Eriksson M, Lindström B. Validity of Antonovsky’s
sense of coherence scale—a systematic review. J
Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59(11):460–6.
8. Bergman E, Malm D, Karlsson JE, Berterö
C. Longitudinal study of patients after myocardial
infarction: sense of coherence, quality of life, and
symptoms. Heart Lung. 2009;38(2):129–40.
9. Mittelmark MB, Bull T, Daniel M, Urke H.Specic
resistance resources in the salutogenic model of
health. In: Mittelmark M, et al., editors. The hand-
book of Salutogenesis. Cham: Springer; 2017.
10. Sagy S, Antonovsky H. The development of the
sense of coherence: a retrospective study of early
life experiences in the family. Int J Aging Hum Dev.
2000;51(2):155–66.
11. Idan O, Eriksson M, Al-Yagon M. The Salutogenic
model: the role of generalized resistance resources.
In: Mittelmark M, et al., editors. The handbook of
Salutogenesis. Cham: Springer; 2017.
12. Sullivan GC. Evaluating Antonovsky’s Salutogenic
model for its adaptability to nursing. J Adv Nurs.
1989;14(4):336–42.
13. Wennerberg MM, Lundgren SM, Eriksson M,
Danielson E.Me and you in caregivinghood—dyadic
resistance resources and decits out of the infor-
mal caregiver’s perspective. Aging Ment Health.
2019;23(8):1041–8.
14. Ding Y, Bao L, Xu H, Hallberg IR.Psychometric
properties of the Chinese version of sense of
coherence scale in women with cervical cancer.
Psychooncology. 2012;21(11):1205–14.
15. Drageset J, Haugan G.Psychometric properties of the
orientation to life questionnaire in nursing home resi-
dents. Scand J Caring Sci. 2016;30(3):623–30.
16. Gana K, Garnier S.Latent structure of the sense of
coherence scale in a French sample. Personal Individ
Differ. 2001;31(7):1079–90.
17. Lajunen T.Cross-cultural evaluation of Antonovsky’s
orientation to life questionnaire: comparison between
Australian, Finnish, and Turkish young adults.
Psychol Rep. 2019;122(2):731–47.
18. Feldt T, Lintula H, Suominen S, Koskenuvo
M. Structural validity and temporal stability of the
13-item sense of coherence scale: prospective evi-
dence from the population-based HeSSup study. Qual
Life Res. 2007;16(3):483–93.
19. Naaldenberg J. Tobi H. van den esker F.Vaandrager
L. psychometric properties of the OLQ-13 scale to
measure sense of coherence in a community- dwelling
older population. Health Qual Life Outcomes.
2011;23(9):37.
20. Richardson CG, Ratner PA, Zumbo BD.A test of the
age-based measurement invariance and temporal sta-
bility of Antonovsky’s sense of coherence scale. Educ
Psychol Meas. 2007;67(4):679–96.
21. Hittner JB. Factorial invariance of the 13-item sense
of coherence scale across gender. J Health Psychol.
2007;12(2):273–80.
22. Hagquist C, Andrich D.Is the sense of coherence-
instrument applicable on adolescents? A latent trait
analysis using Rasch-modelling. Personal Individ
Differ. 2004;36(4):955–68.
23. Moksnes UK, Haugan G. Validation of the orienta-
tion to life questionnaire in Norwegian adolescents.
Construct validity across samples. Soc Ind Res.
2014;119(2):1105–20.
24. Eriksson M, Lindström B. Antonovsky’s sense of
coherence scale and the relation with health: a sys-
tematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006
May;60(5):376–81.
25. von Humboldt S, Leal I, Pimenta F.Sense of coher-
ence, sociodemographic, lifestyle, and health-related
factors in older adults’ subjective well-being. Int J
Gerontol. 2015;9(1):15–9.
26. Länsimies H, Pietilä AM, Hietasola-Husu S,
Kangasniemi M.A systematic review of adolescents’
sense of coherence and health. Scand J Caring Sci.
2017 Dec;31(4):651–61.
27. Nilsson KW, Leppert J, Simonsson B, Starrin B.Sense
of coherence and psychological well-being: improve-
ment with age. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010
Apr;64(4):347–52.
28. Honkinen PL, Suominen SB, Välimaa RS, Helenius
HY, Rautava PT. Factors associated with perceived
health among 12-year-old school children. Relevance
of physical exercise and sense of coherence. Scand J
Public Health. 2005;33(1):35–41.
29. Elyasi M, Abreu LG, Badri P, Saltaji H, Flores-Mir
C, Amin M. Impact of sense of coherence on oral
health behaviors: a systematic review. PLoS One.
2015;10(8):e0133918.
30. Garcia-Moya I, Jimenez-Iglesias A, Moreno C.Sense
of coherence and substance use in Spanish adoles-
cents. Does the effect of SOC depend on patterns
of substance use in their peer group? Adicciones.
2013;25(2):109–17.
31. Mattila ML, Rautava P, Honkinen PL, Ojanlatva A,
Jaakkola S, Aromaa M, Suominen S, Helenius H,
U. K. Moksnes
45
Sillanpää M.Sense of coherence and health behaviour
in adolescence. Acta Paediatr. 2011;100(12):1590–5.
32. Lindmark U, Stegmayr B, Nilsson B, Lindahl B,
Johansson I.Food selection associated with sense of
coherence in adults. Nutr J. 2005;28(4):9.
33. Flensborg-Madsen T, Ventegodt S, Merrick J.Sense of
coherence and physical health. A review of previous
ndings. ScienticWorldJournal. 2005;25(5):665–73.
34. Endler PC, Haug TM, Spranger H.Sense of coherence
and physical health. A “Copenhagen interpretation” of
Antonovsky’s SOC concept. ScienticWorldJournal.
2008;20(8):451–3.
35. Lindström B, Eriksson M.The Hitchhiker’s guide to
Salutogenesis: salutogenic pathways to health pro-
motion (research report no. 2). Helsinki: Helsinki
Folkhälsan Research Center, Health Promotion
Research IUHPE Global Group on Salutogenesis;
2010.
36. Hakanen JJ, Feldt T, Leskinen E.Change and stabil-
ity of sense of coherence in adulthood: longitudinal
evidence from the healthy child study. J Res Pers.
2006;41(3):602–17.
37. Drageset J, Espehaug B, Kirkevold M.The impact of
depression and sense of coherence on emotional and
social loneliness among nursing home residents with-
out cognitive impairment—a questionnaire survey. J
Clin Nurs. 2012;21(7-8):965–74.
38. Drageset J, Eide GE, Ranhoff AH.Depression is asso-
ciated with poor functioning in activities of daily liv-
ing among nursing home residents without cognitive
impairment. J Clin Nurs. 2011;20(21-22):3111–8.
39. Haugan G, Moksnes UK, Espnes GA. Nurse-
patient interaction: a resource for hope in cogni-
tively intact nursing home patients. J Holist Nurs.
2013;31(3):152–63.
40. Drageset J, Nygaard HA, Eide GE, Bondevik M,
Nortvedt MW, Natvig GK. Sense of coherence as a
resource in relation to health-related quality of life
among mentally intact nursing home residents—a
questionnaire study. Health Qual Life Outcomes.
2008;21(6):85.
41. Drageset J, Eide GE, Nygaard HA, Bondevik M,
Nortvedt MW, Natvig GK.The impact of social sup-
port and sense of coherence on health-related quality
of life among nursing home residents—a question-
naire survey in Bergen, Norway. Int J Nurs Stud.
2009;46(1):65–75.
42. Lundman B, Aléx L, Jonsén E, Norberg A, Nygren B,
Santamäki Fischer R, Strandberg G.Inner strength—
a theoretical analysis of salutogenic concepts. Int J
Nurs Stud. 2010;47(2):251–60.
43. Bergman E, Malm D, Ljungquist B, Berterö C,
Karlsson JE.Meaningfulness is not the most impor-
tant component for changes in sense of coherence.
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2012;11(3):331–8.
44. Silarova B, Nagyova I, Rosenberger J, Studencan
M, Ondusova D, Reijneveld SA, van Dijk JP. Sense
of coherence as an independent predictor of health-
related quality of life among coronary heart disease
patients. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(10):1863–71.
45. Norekvål TM, Fridlund B, Moons P, Nordrehaug JE,
Saevareid HI, Wentzel-Larsen T, Hanestad BR.Sense
of coherence—a determinant of quality of life over
time in older female acute myocardial infarction sur-
vivors. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19(5–6):820–31.
46. Myers V, Drory Y, Gerber Y.Sense of coherence pre-
dicts post-myocardial infarction trajectory of leisure
time physical activity: a prospective cohort study.
BMC Public Health. 2011;19(11):708.
47. Ekman I, Fagerberg B, Lundman B.Health-related
quality of life and sense of coherence among
elderly patients with severe chronic heart failure
in comparison with healthy controls. Heart Lung.
2002;31(2):94–101.
48. Nilsen V, Bakke PS, Rohde G, Gallefoss F.Is sense
of coherence a predictor of lifestyle changes in
subjects at risk for type 2 diabetes? Public Health.
2015;129(2):155–61.
49. Merakou K, Koutsouri A, Antoniadou E, Barbouni A,
Bertsias A, Karageorgos G, Lionis C.Sense of coher-
ence in people with and without type 2 diabetes melli-
tus: an observational study from Greece. Ment Health
Fam Med. 2013;10(1):3–13.
50. Kouvonen AM, Väänänen A, Woods SA, Heponiemi
T, Koskinen A, Toppinen-Tanner S. Sense of coher-
ence and diabetes: a prospective occupational cohort
study. BMC Public Health. 2008;6(8):46.
51. Ahola AJ, Saraheimo M, Forsblom C, Hietala K,
Groop PH.The cross-sectional associations between
sense of coherence and diabetic microvascular com-
plications, glycaemic control, and patients’ concep-
tions of type 1 diabetes. Health Qual Life Outcomes.
2010;29(8):142.
52. Ahola AJ, Mikkilä V, Saraheimo M, Wadén J,
Mäkimattila S, Forsblom C, Freese R, Groop
PH. Sense of coherence, food selection and leisure
time physical activity in type 1 diabetes. Scand J
Public Health. 2012;40(7):621–8.
53. Gerasimcik-Pulko V, Pileckaite-Markoviene M,
Bulotiene G, Ostapenko V. Relationship between
sense of coherence and quality of life in early
stage breast cancer patients. Acta Med Litu.
2009;16(3–4):139–44.
54. Sarenmalm E, Browall M, Persson LO, Fall-Dickson
J, Gaston-Johansson F. Relationship of sense of
coherence to stressful events, coping strategies, health
status, and quality of life in women with breast cancer.
Psychooncology. 2013;22(1):20–7.
55. Gustavsson-Lilius M, Julkunen J, Keskivaara P,
Lipsanen J, Hietanen P.Predictors of distress in can-
cer patients and their partners: the role of optimism
in the sense of coherence construct. Psychol Health.
2012;27(2):178–95.
56. Bruscia K, Shultis C, Dennery K, Dileo C.The sense
of coherence in hospitalized cardiac and cancer
patients. J Holist Nurs. 2008;26(4):286–94.
57. Gustavsson-Lilius M, Julkunen J, Keskivaara P,
Hietanen P. Sense of coherence and distress in can-
cer patients and their partners. Psychooncology.
2007;16(12):1100–10.
4 Sense ofCoherence
46
58. Winger JG, Adams RN, Mosher CE. Relations of
meaning in life and sense of coherence to distress in
cancer patients: a meta-analysis. Psychooncology.
2016;25(1):2–10.
59. Langeland E, Vinje HF. The signicance of
Salutogenesis and well-being in mental health pro-
motion: from theory to practice. In: Keyes C, editor.
Mental well-being. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013.
60. Skärsäter I, Langius A, Agren H, Häggström L,
Dencker K. Sense of coherence and social support
in relation to recovery in rst-episode patients with
major depression: a one-year prospective study. Int J
Ment Health Nurs. 2005;14(4):258–64.
61. Skärsäter I, Rayens MK, Peden A, Hall L, Zhang M,
Agren H, Prochazka H.Sense of coherence and recov-
ery from major depression: a 4-year follow-up. Arch
Psychiatr Nurs. 2009;23(2):119–27.
62. Langeland E, Wahl AK, Kristoffersen K, Hanestad
BR. Promoting coping: salutogenesis among people
with mental health problems. Issues Ment Health
Nurs. 2007;28(3):275–95.
63. Kouvonen AM, Väänänen A, Vahtera J, Heponiemi T,
Koskinen A, Cox SJ, Kivimäki M.Sense of coherence
and psychiatric morbidity: a 19-year register-based
prospective study. J Epidemiol Community Health.
2010;64(3):255–61.
64. WHO. The Ottawa Charter for health promo-
tion. Geneva: WHO; 1986. https://www.who.int/
healthpromotion/conferences/previous/ottawa/en/.
65. WHO.Ageing and health 2018. Geneva: WHO; 2018.
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/
ageing-and-health.
66. WHO. Noncommunicable diseases country pro-
les 2018. Geneva: World Health Organization;
2018. https://www.who.int/nmh/publications/
ncd-proles-2018/en/
67. Pelikan JM. The application of Salutogenesis in
healthcare settings. In: Mittelmark M, etal., editors.
The handbook of Salutogenesis. Cham: Springer;
2017.
68. Heggdal K, Lovaas BJ.Health promotion in specialist
and community care: how a broadly applicable health
promotion intervention inuences patient’s sense of
coherence. Scand J Caring Sci. 2018;32(2):690–7.
69. Johansson BA, Pettersson K, Tydesten K, Lindgren
A, Andersson C. Implementing a salutogenic treat-
ment model in a clinical setting of emergency child
and adolescent psychiatry in Sweden. J Child Adolesc
Psychiatr Nurs. 2018;31(2–3):79–86.
70. Mjøsund NH, Eriksson M, Espnes GA, Vinje
HF. Reorienting Norwegian mental healthcare ser-
vices: listen to patients’ learning appetite. Health
Promot Int. 2019;34(3):541–51.
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in
any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license,
unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons
license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to
obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
U. K. Moksnes