Changing the way you learn

STRESS

In Everyday Life
1. Life Changes
  1. Holmes & Rahe (1967) - relationship between stress and illness - major life events occur prior to physical illness
    1. Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS) - are life events related to physical illness?
      1. Contained 43 life events (ranked in order of percieved stressfulness and gvien a numerical value, Life Change Unit (LCU)
      2. Rahe et al. (1970) - 2700 Navy personnel - life events (prior 6 months) & illness score - positive correlation found
  2. Evaluation
    1. Positive & negative events - scale focuses on change rather than negativity and how much readjustment each change involves
      1. Researchers argue that health is more likely to be affected if the change is 'undesired, unscheduled and uncontrolled'
    2. Life changes and daily hassles - Lazarus (1990) major life changes = rare and minor daily hassles have greater impact on health
      1. Supported - positive correlation between daily hassles/no correlation between life events and health problems
    3. Individual differences
      1. Life changes - different significance - sudden death, greater impact
    4. Spurious relationship
      1. Research has only studied correlation, can't establish cause and effect
        Possible that other factors are responsible for health problems - E.G. levels of anxiety increase susceptibility to illness
2. Daily Hassles
  1. The Hassles and Uplifts Scale (HSUP) (Delongis et al. 1982) - considers both positive and negative events in life
  2. Daily Hassles - Bouteyre et al. (2007) - relationship between daily hassles and depression
    1. 41% 1st years in France shown to have depressive symptoms - positively correlated with hassle scale scores
      1. Suggests transition to Uni has a high incidence of daily hassles which increase risk of developing depression
  3. Daily Uplifts - (Gervais, 2005) - nurses asked to record daily hassles and uplifts for 1 month
    1. Evident that hassles increased job strain and decreased performance/uplifts counteracted negative effects of hassles and improved perfomance
  4. Daily hassles are considered to be a more significant source of stress than major life changes
    1. Ruffin (1993) - daily hassles linked to physical and physiological problems more than negative life events
    2. Flett et al (1955) - people experiencing daily hassles recieve less social/emotional support than people experiencing major life effents
      1. May explain explain the greater negative impact of daily hassles on psychological wellbeing
  5. Evaluation
    1. The Accumulation Effect
      1. Build up of minor stressors can lead to irritation and frustration - this can lead to more serious mental health disorders (anxiety/depression)
    2. The Amplification Effect
      1. Stress that results from major life changes makes people more vulnerable to daily hassles
        Individual already in state of distress, additional associated minor stressors may amplify stress
        Individuals experienced major life events - less likely to be able to cope with minor stressors
    3. Methodological Problems
      1. Retrospective recall
        Attempts to recall and rate hassles experienced during previous month could raise issues
        Attempted to overcome this by using a diary method so that hassles and uplifts can be rated on a daily basis
      2. Research
        Cause and effect cannot be established where hassles and wellbeing are concerned (data is only correlational)
        However, suggested that hassles can potentially damage our health but other factors may also be responsible
3. Workplace Stress
  1. Marmot et al. (1997) studies stress in civil servants in relation to the 'job-strain model' (High workload/Low job control)
    1. High grade civil servants = High workload/ Low grade " " = Low job control
    2. +7000 civil servants Q'd about workload, job control and social support and checked for signs of cardiovascular disease
      1. P's assessed 5 years later, no relationship found between high workload and stress-related illness
  2. Johansson et al. (1978) - swedish sawmill workers (high workload/low job control) - found higher levels of adrenaline and illness rates
  3. Marmot et al. eventually discovered high grade civil servants developed fewer cardiovascular diseases than low grade civil servants
    1. High grade worker's greater sense of job control and better levels of social support
  4. Role Conflict - between work and family demands
    1. Can lead to higher levels of absenteeism, lower levels of performance and impaired physical and mental health
    2. Pomaki et al. (2007) - role conflict related to emotional exhaustion, depression and physical health problems - study of 226 hospital doctors
  5. Evaluation
    1. Consequences of workplace stress
      1. Stress and coronary heart disease
        Meta-analysis of 14 studies studying relationship
        Results of 83,000 employees from Europe, the US and Japan suggested that high level job strain = 50% more likely to develop CHD
      2. Workplace stress and mental health
        Risk of developing depression increases if stress at work is combined with other problems (home/daily hassles)
        Warr (1987) - low levels of opportunity for; control, skill use and interpersonal contact could lead to mental health problems
    2. Problems with the study of workplace stress
      1. Lazarus (1995) emphasised individual differences as to how people respond and cope with specific stressors
        His transactional approach focused on impact of stressors being dependant upon person's perceived ability to cope
        High job demands and role ambiguity = stressful to one person but not to another - makes it difficult to draw conclusions
      2. Evolution of work and work stressors
        Technology and nature of work environment make knowledge of workplace stressors outdated
4. Personality Factors and Stress
  1. Personality = behaviours, attitudes and temperament that generally distinguish us from others
    1. Research indicates some personality characteristics makes us more vulnerable to negative effects of stress whilst others make us more resistant
  2. Friedman & Rosenman (1959) - Type A = competitiveness and acheivment striving, impatience and time urgency and hostility and aggressiveness
    1. Raised blood pressure and levels of stress hormones which could both be related to CHD
    2. Type B = relaxed, patient and easy-going so less likely to suffer from stress-related illness
  3. Research on Type A
  4. Enter text here
5. Psychological Methods of Stress Management
6. Physiological Methods of Stress Management
As a Bodily Response

Next up

STRESS

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by hannah_simons over 11 years ago