Are there limits within which self-control models will work?
For Robison, the limit to his problem-focused coping came when he was continually rejected by all the other children, time and time again, for being unable to work with them. This suggests an upper stress limit for applications of explanatory style.
The theory of rumination also has limits. The friends of mine who ruminate excessively often only do so for certain things- social situations, certain schoolwork projects, and family issues. There are other things, which come more naturally, which they do not think of at all, such as hobbies, habits, and routines. This suggests an area limit for rumination coping.

Gender differences in self regulation:

• Women tend to diet more, and focus more on what they eat. Are they successful at this self-regulation?
• Men tend to regulate themselves socially around women, more than around other men. Women sometimes tend to be unabashedly, relentlessly social, around either gender. Are men better at regulating social interaction with the opposite gender?
• Women supposedly get better grades in college. Are they better at self-regulating academically?
• Men tend to be involved in fewer extra curricular activities. Are they better at self-regulating obligations, so as not to be overwhelmed?

I think that the idea of being introverted matches very well with the concept of social interaction as requiring self-regulation. In my experiences adjusting to the college environment, one of the hardest things to accept was the idea that I would have to see and interact with people every day, no matter how I felt. As a homeschooled student, I could easily limit my social interaction in high school, if I didn't feel up to people. I didn't often; I had friends and eventually took classes at the public school where I had to come every day. But social interactions still take work for me, and I still have days where I would just rather not talk to anyone.

from sarahseeandersen.tumblr.com

The fundamental attribution error is assuming that the actions of others are caused by internal factors- things you have done to/for them, for instance- instead of external factors to you- their relationships, challenges, and lives in general.
This is a piece of advice my Mom always gave me when I was younger. She told me that just because someone treats you badly, it isn't your fault. It's important to consider the other factors.
There is a similar concept advanced by young adult author John Green, especially in his book Paper Towns. He terms it "imagining people complexly," looking at other people in the context of their own lives, and respecting that they are also immeasurably complex, and cannot be summed up by quick titles, labels, or stereotypes.

One of the most iconic counter-culture apparel trends is the Converse All-Star shoe. The company started out as a rebellion against the monopoly of rubber companies in order to directly produce rubber sneakers, and went on to represent teenage rebellion throughout the sixties. But in 2003, the Converse company was bought by Nike, one of the large shoe companies. It still markets its shoes as "celebrating the spirit of rebellion and originality," but this has a hollow ring, when they are produced by a mainstream company.
I think this trend, for the new and original to become mainstream and identifiable, is seen in many movements. The ideas that we see now as rock and roll, punk, and more recently, grunge and "alternate" (or hipster) culture have become so widespread that they are no longer as unique as they were intended to be.
People, even those who seek to stand out, still want to fit in. This model, seen in the growth and acquisition of Converse and the explosion of teenage trends, is intrinsically ironic and very interesting.

Does rest really improve concentration, and ability to self-regulate class work?
Yes, and I would argue that it does not even have to be complete rest. In my experience, being lazy to the extent of professional indolence tends to put me out of practice at doing homework. Spring break was a busy week, full of spending time with friends, visiting places, and going on adventures. Yet, since I returned to school, I have had more success motivating myself to do homework than I had for weeks before the break. I hope this trend continues.
It's also possible that my increased self-regulatory ability has simply come from the fact that I've spent a week not thinking at all about my self-regulatory ability, in which case, it's about to come to an abrupt halt.

Tasks which will require self-regulation:

• Concentration in class
• Starting on break homework
• Drinking less caffeine
• Eating less sugar and more vegetables

Mental tasks, 3-6-2013

• Getting out of bed
• Going to classes, paying attention
• Starting, concentrating on, and finishing assignments 
• Leaving indoors to walk in the cold
• Going to newspaper meeting
• Going to sleep at a reasonable time

Traits of alcoholism, as related to Glass Castle
Alcohol addicts in the study displayed higher "harm avoidance" levels, which fits very much with the character of Rex Walls, who didn't really solve any of his problems, he just tried to get out of or around them. They also have lower levels of self-transcendence, or ability to see beyond their present circumstances. For a family always moving around, there would be little hope if you were unable to see beyond the problems facing your immediate family, because that is all you have.
Interestingly, as a child, Walls' younger sister also seems to fulfill characteristics that match up with alcoholism. This seems almost to foreshadow her downfall in New York. She goes to her friends' house instead of living at home, just like Rex Walls leaves for days at a time, unable to transcend self. Her ultimate move- traveling to California instead of trying to live in New York with her family- also shows harm avoidance.
It seems clear that the tendency of alcohol addiction to run in families is due not only to genetics and family situations, but also to character, because none of the other Walls children has this much trouble functioning as an adult.

Problem-focused coping involves solving problems, while emotion-focused coping involves minimizing them. At first, the logic of problem-focused coping, and its mathematical sense, seems to recommend it as the unquestionable best tactic. But is emotional coping really wrong? One of the attributes is "perceiving value in putting up with negative events." Isn't this patience, commonly considered a virtue? It also involves "regulat[ing] emotional response," which is an attribute of successful adulthood. It's a good thing that all people use both forms of response, because I think that they are both useful, and emotion-focused coping shouldn't be so discounted.