MISS, Psychology, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Psychology

MISS

MISS This paper will focus on stimulus response theories to stress, it will touch upon the controversy surrounding this theory and will look at other explanations to stress in comparison. Any of us have experienced rapid heart rate, sweaty hands, and anxiety while watching a very suspenseful and frightening movie in the comfort of a cinema or in the security of our own homes. These physiological responses, caused simply by viewing the images on the screen and listening to the supporting dialogue, illustrate the intricate nerve and hormonal linkages that exist between the body and mind. More subtly, these responses may also occur in situations that threaten one’s psychological or physical well-being. Public-speaking anxiety and the discomfort of embarrassment are common examples of the more subtle mind-body responses. The linkage between the mind and the body is powerful and has important implications for the individual’s health (Rowe & Kahn, 1998; Pelletier, 1996). The stress response, an example of the body-mind relationship, is a physiological and psychological reaction to the demands, real or imagined, that confront us daily. Dr Hans Selye (1974) defined stress as “the non-specific response of the body to any demand made upon it” He has categorised those responses along a continuum ranging from positive stress or “eustress” to negative stress “distress”. Eustress is the emotional reaction experienced when struggling for the creative performance in athletics or in seeking solutions to various events in our lives, which may also be manifested in emotions of happiness, such as your best friends wedding. As stress increases, performance follows along an inverted-U continuum. With the initial rise in stress, the performance is enhanced. But at a certain point, the increased intensity of the stress becomes so great that one’s performance begins to decline and distress sets in. Distress is seen as an event or thought that is perceived to be threatening to one’s safety of psychological well-being, such as walking alone at night in an unlit street (Spirduso, 1995). Upon recognising a stressor, the brain initiates the stress response by releasing hormones and neurotransmitters, creating the “fight or flight” phenomenon where the preparation of the body to stand and fight or flee from danger. This is an excellent example of the mind-body relationship and is seen as a common reaction to most stressors (Spiruso, 1995). Stress hormones (catecholamines and corticosteroids) enter the circulatory system (Pennisi, 1997). The catecholamines epinephrine (adrenaline) and norepinephrine (noradrenaline) increases the heart rate and blood pressure. Inhibition of the digestive system, increased muscle tension, and depression may also result from prolonged stress. From this view then, stress is how one feels and reacts to heavy demands. This response might include physiological, cognitive, affective and behavioural components, and is usually perceived by an individual as noxious. This is better explained through the General Adaptive Syndrome model where Selye repeatedly emphasised that any condition of stress, regardless of how it is perceived or reacted psychologically, will produce wear or tear through the general adaptive syndrome (GAS, Selye, 1974). A problem with the GAS model is that some stressors elicit a stronger emotional response than others do. The theory does not take into account of psychosocial processes. A sudden increase in temperature, for example would produce more emotion than a gradual increase. This theory incorrectly assumes that all stressors produce the same physiological reasons and fails to take into account of psychosocial factors in stress. Unfortunately, because of the historic derivation of the term and the subsequent general usage of the term as a stimulus response or process, much research into stress has not had a clear operational definition of the concept. This is acknowledged by Compas, (1987) and Lazarus and Folkman, (1984). In 1966 Lazarus tried to settle the problem by: … regarding stress as a very general concept like emotion, motivation or cognition, but organized around the meaning of transactions that tax or exceed the person’s resources of a social system. (Lazarus et al, 1984 (p. 307)). This definition has the advantage of concentrating upon the process, rather than the stressors that may cause the process. However, much research does regard stress as a stimulus and/or response and so stressful events have been the focus of much previous research. In contrast, some prefer to view stress as the situation of high demands and limited sources (e.g. Cox, 1978). Others would view stress as a perceived threat where the reflection of our own perception cannot cope with our environment, termed the cognitive appraisal or stress-coping theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Based on this theory of stress-coping, behavioural disturbance is conceptualised here as a stress phenomenon in which the appraisal and coping processes are central. From the literature much has been learned about stress. It now seems much more likely that the third definition of the meaning of the word stress, as described by Carpenter (1992) “…stress is best used as a general term of the total process linking demands to reactions and other outcomes. ” (p. 2). Is one, which more adequately captures the complexity of the concept. Questions have been raised about the adequacy of a stimulus response model as it infers, if a stimulus, is ‘out there’, and for both stimulus and response there is an implication that stressors contain something , which is inherently stressful. This physiological theory to stress assumes that all stressors produce the same physiological reactions, does not take into account of psychological factors in stress. Other theorists have considered stress to be a total process rather than just situational or a response (Transactional model/cognitive appraisal). Importance needs to be given to the process of interpretation rather than the response stressors of the nature of the stressor. One of the main arguments for considering stress to be a process is an acknowledgement that the effect of stress varies from person to person. For some, a relatively minor event may have deep repercussions, whilst for others a seemingly major event can be assimilated with no apparent consequence. It is also true that although stressors have potential to cause stress, individuals may not perceive them in this way. This process views stress as a series of interactions and adjustments between the person and the environment, these are called transactions. Stress is not seen as a stimulus or a response, but rather as a process. The person suffering stress is seem as an active agent who can influence the impact of a stressor through behavioural, cognitive and emotional strategies. Adams et al (1976) describes this in the biophysical experiences of stress where a number of factors are taken into account. The biophysical stress tolerance of an individual is not constant and varies according to the novelty of the situation, and as a result of the person’s life history and general state of health. As with the concept of general ability there will be genetically determined limits of tolerance. Another factor is the number of stressful events operating at the one time, the importance of the event to the individual and the duration of the stress (p. 15). Thus, as an individual’s response to stress is seemingly determined by their perception and interpretation of it. Thence a good definition of stress would be that stress is a condition that results when the person/environment transactions lead the individual to perceive a discrepancy-whether real or not-between the demands of a situation and the resources of the persons biological, psychological, or social system. Success and failure in previous transactions would determine the amount of stress perceived. The stimulus-based approaches do not take into consideration of the many factors that can affect our pattern of response to stress. These psychosocial modifiers of stress are listed Personality characteristics may effect the chance of a stressor being perceived as distressful, or may serve to decrease the effects of distress. Kobasa (1981) termed the personality type that encourages positive cognitive appraisal of events, and decisive interaction with stressful events that is aimed at terminating distress responses as hardiness. Kobasa et al (1985) further described hardiness as a resistance resource that consists of commitment (vs. alienation), control (vs. powerlessness), and challenge (vs. threat). These authors suggest that commitment helps people to involve themselves activity in what they are doing; control allows individuals to believe and act as if they can influence the events taking place around them through what they imagine, say, and do; challenge is the factor that creates the expectation that life will change and that these natural changes will stimulate personal development. Together, commitment, control and challenge interrelate to help cope with stressful events (Kobasa et al, 1985). Previous experience can have an effect to our stress levels in that once we experience a particular stressful situation; we are usually able to cope better with it if it occurs again. The experience provides us with the knowledge about the situation and puts us in a more predictable position. We become more aware of how our own behaviour will affect a potentially stressful environment and how we will be affected by it. People with a strong sense of self-efficacy show less psychological and physiological strain in response to stressors (Bandura et al, 1982). Self-efficacy is the belief that we can succeed at something we want to do (Bandura, 1977). People estimate their chances of success and failures on the basis of their prior experiences. With successful previous attempts positively influencing self-efficacy (Theodorakis, 1995). However experiencing stress over a long period of time can produce a feeling of helplessness. As a result of this people may stop striving for goals. This condition is called learned helplessness (Seligman, 1975). Individual differences can have an effect on stress, some people try to protect themselves from the full impact of the stress by denying or emotionally detaching themselves from the situation. Providing information to these people may actually increase their stress levels, rather than decreasing them. Not surprisingly, the impact of stressful events is affected by our social systems. Support and empathy from others greatly softens the degree to which stress is personally viewed. Response to stress can be eased by support from either the family or the community. For example, the recovery of patients from strokes can be significantly affected by the understanding and empathy shown by their family and friends, and studies show that women who have close confiding relationships are less likely to develop stress-related psychiatric problems. Hence social support refers to the perceived comfort, caring, esteem or help the person receives from other people or groups (Cobb, 1976). He describes social support into five types, which are emotional support, esteem support, tangible support, informational support and network support. The type of support depends on the stressful circumstances, for instance, emotional and informational support is particularly important for people who are seriously ill. Stimulus-based approaches to stress are concerned with identifying aspects of the environment that have an unpleasant effect on us. This very simple approach view human stress, as being the same as the physical stress involved in an engineering project e.g. like building a bridge. The concern is with identifying stressful situations and determining how and why they affect the mind and body. It seems difficult to define a situation as stressful without taking into account the responses of the people who might be involved. The degree of stress a particular environment might cause has to be seen as a spectrum. The physiological theory based on the work of Hans Selye views stress as the response to an adverse, or stressful situation is limited in that it ignores the purely emotional or mental factors that can produce a wide variation in the way we respond to potentially stressful situations. Although we can discuss in general term about physiological and psychological responses patterns, we should keep in mind that these patterns are by no means fixed. For each of us, the pattern of response to stress is determined by many factors, some of which were listed above e.g. Individual differences, previous experiences, personality and control. The literature review has presented information on the definitions of stress. The physiological model was introduced as an explanation of the stress response. Several moderators of stress were introduced, these included personality characteristics and hardiness, control and previous experiences. In conclusion, Stress is a general concept organised by transactions between the adult and the environment. The perception of stress is dependent upon the perceived meaning that a transaction has for the individual. Meaning is formed by experience and this is part of the perception process. Stress means different things to different people. Often we think of stress as an externally imposed factor that threatens or makes a demand on our minds and bodies. For example your lecturer tells you that you have to hand in an essay over the next two days. In this case someone prompts a stressful response in you. Most theories view stress as self-imposed and results from an internal state of emotional tension that occurs in various responses to the various demands of living (Cox, 1978). Stress may manifest itself in physiological responses to the demands placed upon us, and many researchers define stress as these responses (Selye, 1982). The literature on stimulus response theories is inadequate, in that they do not take into account of the psychosocial aspect. Stimulus response theories on it’s own is limited, however they have been the cornerstone of much research and still continue to be a valid model of much research. Bibliography: REFERENCES Adams, J., Hayes, J. & Hopson, B. (1976) Transitions-understanding and managing personal change. London: Robertson and Co. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. Bandura, A., Reese, L., & Adams, N.E. (1982). Microanalysis of action and fear arousal as a function of differential levels of perceived self-efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 5-21. Carpenter, B., (1992) Issues and advances in coping research. In: B. Carpenter (Ed.), Personal coping. Theory, research and application. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 38, 300-314. Compas, B. (1975) Stress and life events during childhood and adolescence, Clinical psychology Review, 7, 275-302. Cox, T. (1978). Stress. London: Mac Millan. Kobasa, S.C.O., Maddi, S.R., Puccetti, M.C. (1982). Personality and exercise as buffers in Stress-illness. Journal of Behaviour medicine, 5, 391-403. Kobasa, S.C.O., Maddi, S.R., Puccetti, M.C. (1985). Effectiveness of hardiness, exercise and social support as resources against illness. Journal of psychosomatic Research, 29, 524-533. Lazarus, R. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. London: Mc Graw-Hill. Lazarus, R. & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer. Pelletier, K.R. (1996). Between mind and body: Stress, emotions, and health. In D. Coleman & J. Gurin (Eds.), Mind body medicine. (pp. 19-38). Yonkers, NY: Consumer Report Books. Pennisi, E. (1997). Tracing molecules that make the brain-body connection. Science, 275, 930-931. Rowe, J. W., & Kahn, R.L. (1998). Successful aging. New York: Pantheon books. Selye, H. (1974). Stress without distress. New York: Signet and Mentor books. Selye, H. (1982). History and present status of the stress concept. In L.Goldberger & S. Breznitz (Eds). Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. New York: Free Press. Seligman, M.E.P. (1975). Helplessness. San Franisco: W.H. Freeman. Spirduso, W.W. (1995). Physical dimensions of aging. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Word Count: 2237