824819
Descrição
FlashCards por DauntlessAlpha, atualizado more than 1 year ago
|
Criado por DauntlessAlpha
mais de 10 anos atrás
|
|
| Questão | Responda |
| What are life changes? | Life changes are those events (such as getting married, retiring or dealing with bereavement) that necessitate a major transition in some aspects of our life due to stress they cause which can sometimes be referred to as critical life changes due to impact on life. |
| How did Selye contribute to psychosomatic research and what did Dr Holmes do with this contribution? | Selye was the first to suggest a causal link between the psychological state of stress and the physical symptoms of illness creating a field of psychosomatic research which was investigated further by Dr Holmes who looked at the link between stress-related life changes and physical illness |
| What did Holmes and Hawkins notice about their patients? | Holmes and Hawkins noticed that patients in their care being treated for TB were from poor backgrounds and that it wasn't the poor background itself that increased the risk of TB but the stress of poverty |
| What did Hawkins et al (1957) do to find difference in TB and non-TB workers? What was this difference? | Hawkins et al (1957) compared TB patients and non-TB workers in the sanatorium (matched for age,sex, income, and race) and found more disturbing life events in the previous 2 years in the TB than non-TB patients. |
| What did Holmes and Rahe suggest about stress? | Holmes and Rahe suggested that stress could be measured by amount of life events a person experiences but a standard measurement tool was required. |
| What processes occurred in order to produce the 43 life events and LCUs for the SRE and later the SRRS? | In order to develop it, life changes taken from the case histories of 5000 patient records were given a score by 400 people (of different backgrounds) to produce 43 critical life events. The score was given in terms of the amount of readjustment required for the average person - participants who scored were asked to give a numerical figure for readjustment taking marriage as the arbitrary baseline value of 500. The average score for each event was known as the "Life change unit" (LCU) and this in turn produced 43 life events and LCUs for the "Schedule of Recent Experiences" (SRE) and later the "Social Readjustment Rating Scale" |
| What did the SRE and SRRS allow? | These gave a quantifiable way of measuring stress, enabling a relationship between stress caused by change and existing life changes and illness |
| What ethical constraints led to research using the SRRS + SRE to be retrospective studies? | However ethical constraints mean it was unfair to expose someone to stressors just to see if illness developed so most research using SRRS and SRE were retrospective studies however these involve recalling information which can be subject to memory distortions. |
| How did Rahe et al aim to limit this methodological flaw? | Rahe et al aimed to limit the methodological flaws in retrospective studies by aiming to do a prospective study (where a group of participants are identified at the start and followed forward in time) to investigate if there's a relationship between life events/changes and illness. |
| How many ppts, of what nationality and with what professions? | The study involved 2664 navy and marine personnel serving aboard 3 US Navy cruisers with 2 aircraft carriers involved in military operations of the coast of Vietnam and the other was based in the Mediterranean. |
| What was the mean age of the participants and why was 10% of the sample lost? | The mean age of the participants was 22.3 yrs and 10% of the initial sample was lost due to transfer off the ships |
| What did the Questionnaires that the ppts. were required to fill in consist of? | The participants were required to fill in a military version of the SRE which was a pen and paper questionnaire documenting significant life changes relating to personal, family,community, social, religious, economic, occupational, residential and health experiences. |
| What was the time-period thta the SRE was conducted across? | Each participant completed the SRE every 6 months over a 2 year period prior to a 6-8 month tour of duty at sea. |
| How were the life changes on the SRE assigned a LCU? | Each life change on the SRE was assigned a LCU which affects the severity and readjustment needed for a particular event which was formulated by a sample of US civilians and these assignment of values was repeated with a no. of different samples which increases reliability. |
| What happened when the ships returned? | When the ships returned, a research physician went aboard the medical facility on the ship and reviewed all the sailor's health records and these records had even the most minor health changes enhancing reliability. |
| How were the aims kept secret? | Neither the participants nor the medical department were aware of the research aims and didn't realise the health records would be linked to the SRE questionnaire results |
| What was found about the 2yr period prior to cruise and cruise period illness?Give an explanation for this finding | Rahe et al found no significant correlation between 2 yr period prior to the cruise and cruise period illness. It has to be noted that the illness experienced by the men were generally minor in degree and there were few pre-cruise life changes (which were of low significance) which explain the lack of correlation between the co-variables. A stronger correlation may be demonstrated on a population with a higher illness variability. |
| What correlation was found between 6mth period prior to cruise and cruise period illness? | Rahe et al also found a positive correlation of 0.118 between 6 month period prior to cruise and cruise period illness. |
| Why was this correlation said to be impressive even though it seems weak? | The correlation may sound weak but considering the no. of participants and few life changes experienced by most of the men, the fact that there was any correlation was said to be impressive by by Rahe et al. Also the correlation was supported by being consistent with other prospective and retrospective studies. |
| What cruisers had the strongest relationship between LCUs and CPI? | The strongest relationship (between LCUs and cruise period illness) were for cruisers 1 and 3 |
| WHy were the results for cruiser 2 not as strong and what did this lead Rahe to conclude? | The results for cruiser 2 were not as strong - this is perhaps because cruiser 2 experienced the most arduous deployment which led Rahe et al to conclude that in stressful situations, the effect of previous life changes is overwhelmed by the current environmental stresses |
| How were deciles used? | The crew members were divided into 10 deciles according to TCLUs with decile 1 containing the 10% of the ship's crew with the lowest TCLU and decile 10 containing the highest TCLU scores. |
| What was the MIR for each of the 4 bands and what do these results show? | The LCU groups were divided into 4 bands: LCU group (G) 1,2 - mean illness rating (MIR): 1.405, G3,4,5 - MIR:1.541, LCU G6,7,8 - MIR: 1.676 and LCU of G9,10 - MIR:2.066. These results show there's a clear positive correlation between TCLU score and MIR. Rahe concluded that the results support the notion of a linear relationship between TCLU score and subsequent illness |
| What cruisers were the TCLU differences most apparent in and why? | The TCLU differences were most apparent in cruiser 1 and 3 in married,enlisted men compared to young, single soldiers. Perhaps this is because marriage adds to TCLUs and therefore the older soldiers have probably experienced more life changes |
| Why are questionnaires good? | Questionnaires were used which are quick and effective and collect lots of quantitative data |
| Why is a correlational analysis bad? | Correlational analysis was used and correlation doesn’t imply causation - just because 2 variables correlate doesn't mean 1 causes the other so can’t conclude that life event cause anxiety/stress and therefore illness. |
| How may existing levels of stress/anxiety lower internal validity? | also possible that existing natural level of anxiety/stress (intervening/extraneous variable) influences impact of life events and therefore illness– this lowers internal validity. |
| How does individual differences affect internal validity? | Internal validity is also lowered by participant variables such as individual differences due to genetics – e.g all the illnesses may not be stress induced – non infectious disease such as cancers, CHD can be down to genetics. There may also be individual differences in financial/social support which affects levels of stress and perhaps illness |
| How were demand characteristics and researcher bias avoided? | . However a double blind collection of medical data was carried out which means no demand characteristics or researcher bias which increases internal validity |
| How do sample composition and size affect external validity? | The external validity is low as the sample consisted of all US men with a mean age of 22.3 years which makes it ethnocentric, androcentric and the age is not representative of the general population which means there’s a low population validity and low generalisability as findings can’t be generalized to females, other cultures or other age groups. The sample size being big doesn’t counteract the fact that it wasn’t representative. |
| How is reliability increased by SRE and arthur? | Reliability is increased as SRE was an especially adapted scale appropriate for military personnel, including items such as being selected for promotion. Similar research done by Arthur with naval aviators to find similar results – there’s high replicability and consistency so increased reliability. |
| What lowers reliability? | However information was recalled from the past 2 years by sailors so details may not be reliable. It could also be argued that results and conclusions drawn from a military-adapted questionnaire may not be reflective of what may happen to the general population as several things listed on the SRE won’t be experienced by ordinary citizens lowering reliability. |
| How were ethical issues dealt with in terms of consent and confidentiality? | There are ethical issues due to lack of fully informed consent (probably didn’t give direct consent for their medical files to be accessed), confidentiality issues (sailors’ medical files were accessed) and they weren’t debriefed. |
| What did Cohen et al (1993) find? | Cohen et al (1993) SUPPORTS measured pps stress levels, lack of control and LCU using SRRS pps split into 2 groups: control group given non-infectious nasal drops and experimental group given drops containing common cold, both groups quarantined for 7 days found that pps with high LCU scores more likely to be infected |
| How do Cohen et al's (1993) findings support Rahe et al? | SUPPORTS as shows that there does seem to be a positive relationship between stress and LCU to illness, and that the higher the LCU score, more likely a person is to be ill |
| What did Kiecolt-Glaser (1991, 1984, 1987) find? | found immune function is significantly reduced in highly stressed, groups such as carers for Alzheimer's patients, women divorcing and students sitting exams killer t-cell activity reduced and speed of puncture wound healing |
| How does Kiecolt-Glaser's findings support Rahe et al's? | SUPPORTS/DEVELOPS as suggests some illnesses might be indirectly linked to life changes, suggests that life changes affect immune functioning which makes humans more likely to be ill but only if stressed person exposed to harmful pathogens (bacteria, virus) too |
| What did Delongis et al (1988) find? | used hassles and uplifts scale to assess minor sources of stress in 75 married couples (eg weight concerns, worry over health of family member) uplifts included as thought to reduce impact of daily hassles (eg completing a task, feeling healthy) found correlation of +.59 between hassles score and next day health problems (eg flu, sore throat) but no correlation between health and couples score on LCU scale or for uplifts |
| How does Delongis et al (1988) contradict and develop Rahe et al's research? | CONTRADICTS Rahe et al's findings as suggests that possibly, for most people, minor incidents have more daily impact than major incidents in the SRE/SRRS; if a life change is viewed positively (uplift) it is unlikely to be linked to illness whereas only negative changes (hassles) will be; major life events on the SRE are not frequent enough to apply to majority of people so lacks validity as measure of stress; HOWEVER, study still acknowledges that stress is linked to illness but disputes cause of stress |
Quer criar seus próprios Flashcards gratuitos com GoConqr? Saiba mais.