Reflecting on the Week 6 learning resources, what did you find most interesting or meaningful?
Resourse 2 BELOW ONE A LINK FOR Coping, Kelly McGonigal – How to Make Stress Your Friend AND Stress in Adulthood MATERIAL
TOPIC FOR WEEK 6
The week’s readings (Managing Health, Stress Scale, Stress in Adulthood, Coping, Kelly McGonigal – How to Make Stress Your Friend) and discussion will facilitate our learning this week.
Next, go to Learning Resources to access the course resources for this week.
Weekly Learning Objectives:
· Differentiate between caloric and nutritional needs.
· Explain the link between malnutrition and disease and disorders.
· Identify the benefits of physical exercise to body and mental function.
· Explain why a life course perspective is vital in the study of stress.
· Discuss the challenges that impact the study of coping skills.
1-
2- Stress In Adulthood
The term
stress
is widely used in everyday life, and even scholars have defined and used the term in different ways. However, researchers who study stress have arrived at
a general consensus in the definition of the concept.
Stressor refers to life circumstances that disturb or threaten to disturb the patterns of everyday life. Stressors initiate a process of adaptation to the demands of life. The degree of adaptation required depends on characteristics of the Stressor, such as its intensity or duration. Adaptations that evoke changes in psychological and physical functioning are referred to as
stress responses. The
stress process refers to people’s ongoing adaptation (changes in physical, social, and psychological functioning) to the demands of life. In other words, the stress process is an ongoing system of adaptation to the ups and downs of everyday life; Stressors are antecedents of the stress process; and stress responses are the outcomes of adaptation.
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE STRESS PROCESS
Theoretical perspectives on the stress process emphasize different aspects of the relationship between an individual and his or her physical and social environment.
Biological Perspective The biological perspective considers the underlying physiological responses people exhibit when exposed to Stressors. Author Walter Cannon (1929) wrote that the body physically prepares to handle a Stressor by mounting a short-term defensive response to meet an immediate threat to physical safety. When the brain detects a potential threat, it sends an alert through thePage 453 |
Top of Articlecentral nervous system directly to major bodily systems (e.g., circulatory, respiratory). In response to this alert, the systems release hormones, called catecholamines, to help the person defend against the threat. This response is commonly referred to as the fight-or-flight response. The catecholamines (e.g., adrenaline) trigger processes that provide energy needed by the body to protect itself by either fighting off the threat or running away. Once the threat ceases, the brain signals the release of different hormones (e.g., noradrenaline) prompting the body to return to its normal resting state (i.e., homeostasis). This physiological response is adaptive, allowing people to successfully manage short-term physical Stressors (e.g., a charging woolly mammoth, pulling a child out of deep water, running a race).
Hans Selye (1956) recognized that psychosocial Stressors also could trigger the fight-or-flight response and that many Stressors may endure over long time periods. Thus, he hypothesized that the body needs an alternative response to fuel a prolonged defense. Selye proposed that an alternative, neuroendocrine stress response meets this need. The brain initiates the release of a different type of hormone (i.e., glucocorticoids) that actually triggers the breakdown of proteins and excess body fats to fuel the body’s longer-term response to Stressors. However, without adequate recovery time between Stressors, the body cannot replenish its supply of excess fats and proteins and will burn up essential body cells, eventually leading to physical illness.
The current perspective on the biological stress response suggests that the normal state of an individual is ongoing adaptation to his or her environment. Referred to as
allostasis, this ongoing, self-regulating adaptation promotes a balance between complex bodily systems and the demands of a changing physical and social environment. In this sense, responding to a Stressor is a within-person, self-regulating process that brings physiological systems back into balance. However, repeated physiological adjustments in response to a lifetime of physical and psychological Stressors exact a physical cost on the body, referred to as
allostatic load (McEwen & Stellar, 1993). It is the physical wear and tear from prolonged or continuous activation of the stress response that increases the risk of physical and mental disease and disorder (Seeman, McEwen, Rowe, & Singer, 2001). Current depictions of the stress response posit an interrelationship between the central nervous and endocrine systems, providing a more complete picture of the integrated pathway by which Stressors affect health outcomes. Essentially, the initial response to a Stressor is the activation of the central nervous system, with the endocrine system providing a more protracted response to Stressors.
The way an individual interprets the surrounding physical and social environment affects the way he or she feels about the current situation. These feelings may prompt physiological changes through two physiological pathways: the central nervous system and the hormonal system. These feelings may also initiate behavioral changes or
coping strategies to adapt to the situation. The physiological changes may initiate a change in the functioning of the immune system, which in turn may increase disease susceptibility.
Sociological Perspective The sociological perspective on the stress process focuses on the naturalistic causes of stress or, more specifically, on the social and environmental conditions that serve as sources of stress that then influence individual well-being (Pearlin, 1999). From this perspective, key questions relate to the social conditions (e.g., social positions, roles, and challenging life course events) that trigger the physiological stress response and how the availability and distribution of resources affect people’s ability to successfully manage Stressors. Stress is viewed as a dynamic and ongoing set of interrelationships between the individual and his or her social environment. Although unique circumstances do occur and do affect individuals, research into social stress is concerned with the difficult or threatening circumstances confronted by groups of people who share similar social and economic attributes, that is, the social patterning of stress. Research on social stress also examines the consequences of stress for individual well-being, especially for
mental health.
Psychological Perspective Whereas the sociological perspective examines the social conditions that create potentially stressful situations and the consequent social patterning of stress and well-being, the psychological perspective emphasizes the internal cognitive and behavioral processes that account for individual variations in response to Stressors (Lazarus, 1999). In this sense, the psychological perspective provides a bridge for understanding how life circumstances and physiological responses together affect individual health and well-being. The psychological perspective emphasizes the ways personality and biological factors combine with environmental conditions, allowing people to make meaning of the current situation with respect to individual well-being. Simply put, if an individual perceives a situation as stressful, it is a Stressor. Thus, despite similarities among people experiencing a particular Stressor, individuals respond uniquely to each situation. A key assumption of psychological perspectives on the stress process is that the ways people think about and interpret the circumstances of everyday life changes their physiological response to those circumstances.
Page 454 |
Top of Article
Integrated Perspective Although several perspectives are used to study stress, a common goal for all of them is gaining an understanding of how individuals adapt to the changing circumstances of daily life and the impact of that adaptation on well-being across the life course. Rather than being at odds with each other, integrating findings from different perspectives has the potential to provide a more complete explanation of the stress process and to more effectively delineate the impact of social stress on individual health and well-being (Wheaton,
2001).
TYPES OF STRESSORS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON WELL-BEING
Selye (1956) proposed that anything that initiated a stress response constituted a Stressor. Such a broad definition, however, makes it difficult to systematically study the individual components of the stress process. Thus, social stress research categorizes sources of stress to examine their distinct origins and develop better methods for further investigating their consequences. Social Stressors are challenging conditions emerging from the social contexts of everyday life, including traumas, life events, chronic demands and strains in specific life domains (e.g., work and at home), and minor interruptions to one’s daily routine (daily hassles). Typically, physical Stressors (e.g., environmental exposure to hot or cold weather) and psychological Stressors that focus largely on one’s perceptions of a social Stressor (e.g., ruminating and reliving past situations, or catastrophizing about a current situation) are not considered types of social stress.
Trauma
Extreme events that both overwhelm a person and disrupt the life course (e.g., a violent crime, war, or a life-threatening illness) are referred to as traumas. The magnitude and suddenness of these events may disrupt a person’s mental and physical well-being long after the occurrence of the event (Pearlin, 1999).
One often-studied trauma is combat exposure or war stress. Beginning after World War
II (1939-1945), systematic research documented the effects of combat exposure on psychological health. This research led to the establishment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a psychological condition (Fontana & Rosenheck, 1994). PTSD is an
anxiety disorder observed in persons who have been exposed to an extreme Stressor. In addition to its immediate detrimental impact, war stress has the potential for both ongoing disruption to the life course and onset of PTSD symptomatology late in
adulthood. The effects of wartime trauma extend beyond people with direct combat exposure. Similar disruptive and long-term effects have been found in both
children of military
parents (Shaw, 2003) and nonmilitary relatives of military adults. PTSD and other severe psychological disorders also have been associated with exposure to other trauma conditions, including natural disasters and severe physical injury.
Life Events Life events are discrete, observable, and objectively reportable changes that require some
adjustment on the part of the individual experiencing them. Examples include
marriage, divorce,
death of a loved one, and
loss of a job. Exposure to life events, particularly undesirable and uncontrollable events, is associated with increases in psychological distress. A long research tradition linking life events and
depression provides compelling evidence for a direct link between life events and onset of
major depressive disorder, especially the onset of one’s first major depressive disorder (Kendler, Karkow-ski, & Prescott, 1999). Stressful life events have also been linked to negative physical health outcomes such as coronary heart disease and other physical disorders, including rheumatoid arthritis (Zautra et al, 1998) and AIDS or
HIV (Leserman et al, 1999). Although several studies provide strong support for a link between life event Stressors and physical disease and disorders, the findings must be interpreted with caution, as it may be the combination of life events with other factors (e.g., ongoing life difficulties,
social support, current health status) that influence health outcomes.
Chronic Stressors Chronic Stressors are persistent or recurrent life difficulties, including strains in particular areas of life (e.g., job demands and
family responsibilities), conflicting social roles (e.g., being a parent and worker), or excessive complexity in everyday life. Chronic Stressors activate a prolonged immune response that may lead to physical diseases, including those that suppress immune response (e.g., infection), as well as those that overactivate the immune response (e.g., allergic and autoimmune responses). The open-ended nature of chronic Stressors (not knowing when, or if, the Stressor will end) may deplete biological, psychological, and social resources and thus be particularly influential in increasing the risk of distress and disease.
Job strain, or the combination of high job demands and low control over those demands, is a typical example of a chronic work-related Stressor that contributes to negative psychological and physical outcomes. The effects of job strain may be particularly harmful in high-strain jobs, such as those for service workers and machine-paced operatives (Repetti, 1989).
Caregiving for loved ones is another source of chronic stress. The responsibilities of a primary caregiver include meeting the demands of caring for a loved one with a serious illness as well as the emotional burdens associated with the loved one’s increasing physical and mentalPage 455 |
Top of Articleimpairments. Leonard Pearlin, Joseph Mullan, Shirley Semple, and Marilyn Skaff (1990) referred to the cascading burden of caregiver stress as
stress proliferation, or managing both primary Stressors of caregiving (e.g., tending to the patient’s meals, medications, and hygiene) and secondary Stressors (i.e., additional demands unrelated to the person’s illness). Role strains and resentments are examples of secondary Stressors that may emerge when children care for an
aging parent (Suitor & Pillemer, 1993).
Although chronic Stressors are a distinct type of Stressor, there is often an interrelationship between types of Stressors. Ongoing job strain may lead to an acute life event, such as job layoff. Alternatively, an acute life event such as a divorce may give rise to ongoing financial difficulties. Thus studies that focus on a single type of Stressor may understate the harmful effects of Stressors.
Daily Hassles Daily hassles are defined as relatively minor events arising out of day-to-day living, such as a last-minute change on a work project or a flat tire. Although they may not have the same impact as a life-altering event, daily hassles do significantly influence daily health and psychological well-being. Studies of daily stress and health provide a unique opportunity to examine the unfolding process of stress adaptation within a person (i.e., how the same person responds to changing conditions) by documenting how a person’s reactivity (i.e., how likely he or she is they are to experience distress) fluctuates. Daily diary studies, in which people record their experiences and their reactions to them, offer insight into the dynamic interplay between Stressor exposure and reactivity and how the two combine to affect daily health and well-being (Almeida, Wethington, & Kessler, 2002).
To put it another way, everyone has good days and bad days. On good days, a person may be less reactive to experiences; on bad days, he or she may be more reactive. Daily studies also consider how the characteristics of a Stressor may trigger different responses, both for the same person and for different groups of people. One study found that the type of daily Stressor affected variations in mood (Böiger, DeLongis, Kessler, & Schilling, 1989). Of the 10 categories of Stressors studied, interpersonal tensions were the most upsetting for both men and women.
In a follow-up study, David Almeida and Ronald Kessler (1998) found that although exposure to Stressors was associated with higher levels of distress for both husbands and wives, wives reported more Stressors overall than did husbands. In addition, family demands, arguments with a spouse, arguments with a person besides the spouse, transportation difficulties (e.g., traffic jams, car trouble), and other demands (e.g., those of relatives or friends) were more strongly related to distress for wives than for husbands, whereas work overloads, arguments with children, and financial problems were more strongly related to distress among husbands than among wives.
Associations among Types of Stressors Stressors rarely occur independently; one Stressor may trigger a number of subsequent stressful experiences. Chronic Stressors may lead to more daily hassles or life events. Even minor Stressors can increase in intensity by accumulating and disrupting other aspects of a person’s life or usurping resources needed to manage subsequent circumstances. Thus, considering the association among the Stressors in a person’s life is important to understand the effects of stress on health and well-being. For example, ongoing financial strain following a divorce or job loss may be more damaging to individuals health than the actual event itself.
COPING WITH STRESSORS
Coping typically refers to the things that people do to manage the ups and downs of life. Coping includes both the cognitive and behavioral strategies people use as well as the resources they apply in managing the demands of life.
Coping Strategies There are two primary coping strategies: problem-focused and emotion-focused. Problem-focused coping refers to efforts directed at resolving or removing the source of the Stressor—for example, taking an alternate route to work to avoid traffic caused by road construction. In contrast, emotion-focused coping strategies address the negative
emotions and feelings of distress triggered by a Stressor. Rather than feeling frustrated or angry at traffic delays due to construction, a person may tell him or herself how easy the ride to work will be when the road is finished, or use the time to think about the pleasant things that she or he will do when they arrive at home. In these examples, the Stressor is unchanged, but the negative reaction to the Stressor dissipates.
Much research on coping examines which emotion-focused and problem-focused strategies are effective at minimizing the impact of Stressors. Emotion-focused coping strategies are often associated with
increased distress (Penley, Tomaka, & Wiebe, 2002). Passive coping strategies—for example, avoiding difficult situations rather than dealing with them—have been found to be associated with higher levels of depression and psychological distress. Denial as a coping strategy (e.g., ignoring worsening symptoms or saying that a personal problem “is not real”) also may be maladaptive for chronic illnesses because it does not allow for learning to manage the long-term Stressor (Burker, Evon, Losielle, Finkel, &Page 456 |
Top of ArticleMill, 2005). In contrast, however, denial may have positive effects for people dealing with certain short-term Stressors by diverting attention from the Stressor until it has passed. For example, one study found that avoidant coping was most effective in dealing with the stress of donating blood (Kaloupek, White, & Wong, 1984).
Problem-focused coping strategies, such as seeking social support and problem solving, tend to be favored in individual-oriented Western nations. Problem-focused strategies have been associated with better outcomes for patients dealing with a variety of illnesses and also with helping a patient’s partner psychologically adjust to his or her loved one’s illness (Chandler, Kennedy, & Sandhu, 2007). In general, however, most effective coping responses, particularly to severe Stressors, involve multiple strategies (Folkman, 1997).
Coping Resources Coping resources are assets people have that may alter their reaction to stressful circumstances. In other words, resources are not the things that people do (e.g., strategies) but rather the things they can apply to meet the needs and demands of challenges. Coping resources may be internal (i.e., within the person) or external (i.e., outside of the person).
Internal resources refer to psychological resources that may help or hinder how people cope with Stressors. Personality traits are an example of internal resources. Enduring personality traits are typically associated with differing coping strategies. Personality traits are often conceptualized as consisting of five main dimensions: neuroticism, extroversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (McCrae & Costa, 1986). In terms of use of coping strategies, emotion-focused coping tends to be used by those with high levels of neuroticism, as well as by those who are open and agreeable. Extroversion and conscientiousness, as well as agreeableness, have been associated with the use of problem-focused coping strategies (Penley & Tomaka, 2002). It is possible that these personality characteristics themselves may serve to either exacerbate or buffer the effects of stress. For example, in an experimental study in which participants were assigned a stressful cognitive task (giving a speech on a controversial topic), people who were extroverted, open, agreeable, and conscientious were more satisfied with their performance on lab tasks than those with high levels of neuroticism. Neurotic individuals also reported more negative emotions such as anxiety, fear, and self-disgust (Penley & Tomaka, 2002). A similar pattern emerges in response to chronic Stressors.
Other personality traits also may modify the impact of a Stressor. For example, an optimistic disposition buffers the effects of Stressors for patients suffering from chronic diseases perceived to be uncontrollable (Fournier, de Rid-der, & Bensing, 2002). Whether a person sees events as within his or her control
(internal locus of control) or outside of his or her control
(external locus of control) has been shown to affect people’s responses to Stressors; an internal locus of control is more effective in coping with Stressors. Negative events are more strongly correlated with anxiety for people with external, as opposed to internal, locus of control (Sandier & Lakey, 1982).
