This meta-analysis examines the relationship between personality traits and coping strategies, using 2,653 effect sizes from 165 samples and 33,094 participants. The study found that personality traits, particularly extraversion and conscientiousness, weakly predicted broad coping strategies such as engagement and disengagement, but all five Big Five traits predicted specific coping strategies. Extraversion and conscientiousness were associated with more problem-solving and cognitive restructuring, while neuroticism predicted problematic strategies like wishful thinking, withdrawal, and emotion-focused coping. The analysis also revealed that personality more strongly predicted coping in younger samples, stressed samples, and those reporting dispositional rather than situation-specific coping. Additionally, daily versus retrospective coping reports and self-selected versus researcher-selected stressors moderated these relationships. Cross-cultural differences were noted, with ethnically diverse samples showing more protective effects of personality. The study emphasizes the importance of assessing personality facets and specific coping strategies, using both laboratory and daily report studies, and conducting multivariate analyses to better understand the role of personality in the coping process.This meta-analysis examines the relationship between personality traits and coping strategies, using 2,653 effect sizes from 165 samples and 33,094 participants. The study found that personality traits, particularly extraversion and conscientiousness, weakly predicted broad coping strategies such as engagement and disengagement, but all five Big Five traits predicted specific coping strategies. Extraversion and conscientiousness were associated with more problem-solving and cognitive restructuring, while neuroticism predicted problematic strategies like wishful thinking, withdrawal, and emotion-focused coping. The analysis also revealed that personality more strongly predicted coping in younger samples, stressed samples, and those reporting dispositional rather than situation-specific coping. Additionally, daily versus retrospective coping reports and self-selected versus researcher-selected stressors moderated these relationships. Cross-cultural differences were noted, with ethnically diverse samples showing more protective effects of personality. The study emphasizes the importance of assessing personality facets and specific coping strategies, using both laboratory and daily report studies, and conducting multivariate analyses to better understand the role of personality in the coping process.