The Coping Sequence Stressor Primary Appraisal (Harm, Threat, Challenge) External Resources and Impediments Tangibles Social Support Other life stressors.

The Coping SequenceStressor

Primary Appraisal (Harm, Threat, Challenge)

External Resources and Impediments

Tangibles

Social Support

Other life stressors Internal Resources and Impediments

Typical coping style

Other personality factors

Secondary Appraisal

Coping Tasks/Goals

Coping Outcomes

Moderators

Moderators

Negative Affect (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen)

Defined: Pervasive negative mood marked by anxiety, depression, and hostility.

Find many situations difficult to manage

Resort to unhealthy coping behaviors (such as?)

Related to poor health: asthma, arthritis, ulcers, headaches, CHD

Related to excess complaining:

a. More symptomsb. Higher use of health servicesc. Higher rates of self-reported illnessd. These people may compromise validity of self-reported illness

Class 10 Optimism, Part II

Announcements:

Read Kriegel Falling Into Life for Next Thurs.

1. Focus on Introduction and Discussion

2. Skim "Methods", know what was done.

3. Skip over "Results" section

About Reading Research Articles

Hardiness

Commitment: Get fully involved

Control: Strong internal Locus of Control (LOC)

Challenge: Seek out opportunities, meet challenges head on.

Why would these qualities moderate stress? Appraisal processes

Active, not avoidant

Hardiness and Executives Study Kobassa, 1979

Subjects: 160 execs. under high stress, per Holmes & Rahe scale

Group A (n = 86) experiences stress but no illnessGroup B (n = 75) experiences stress with illness

Illness measured by self report.

What distinguishes Group A from Group B?

Kobassa sends execs questionnaire:a. Internal/external LOCb. Commitment to life challengesc. Change as challenge rather than threat.

Responses confirm hardiness model: Control, commitment, challenge

Problems with this study?

Illness self reported (High NA?) Design is correlational

High Stress/Low Illness

High Stress/High Illness

CONTROL

Nihilism Hardy < Not Hardy

External LOC Hardy < Not Hardy

Powerlessness Hardy < Not Hardy

Commitment

Alienation from Self Hardy < Not Hardy

Challenge

Vegetativeness Hardy < Not Hardy

Adventurousness Hardy > Not Hardy

Relation Between Hardiness and CopingKobasa, 1979

Self Efficacy

Robt. Bandura

Efficacy, Stress, and Immunocompetence

Background:Animals exposed to stressor (shock)

Group A: Believes has controlGroup B: Believes has NO control

Outcome: Opioids in system

Which animals produce MORE opioids? Group B--No Control

Efficacy, Stress, and Immunocompetence

Stress --> ______ path --> ______ stim --> _____ --> opiods

How do opioids affect immune system? ____________

Thus, less control --> ___more stress OR ___ less stress -->

___more opioids OR ___ less opioids --> ___ Immunocompetence OR

___ Immunocompromise

ACTH adrenal cortisol

depress it

X

X

X

1. SAM: Sympathetic-adrenomedullary

Event cortex hypothalamus SNS adrenal medulla catecholamines charged feeling increased BP, HR, etc.

SAM Corresponds to Cannon's stress model

2. HPA: Hypothlamic-pituitary-adreocortical

Event cortex hypothalamus coritcotrophin releasing factor (CRF) pituitary adrencorticotropic hormone (ACTH) adrenal cortex

corticosteriods conserves carbos reduces inflammation

HPA corresponds to Selye's stress model

Physiology of Stress

Predicted model:

Failure --> stress --> opioids --> less pain --> (immunocompromise)

Four groups:1. Success, pain, opioid blocker2. Success, pain, no opioid blocker3. Failure, pain, opioid blocker4. Failure, pain, no opioid blocker

Evidence that Efficacy ModeratesStress --> Illness Connection in Humans

Bandura, Cioffi, Taylor, & Brouillard, 1988

Efficacy Manipulation

High Efficacy Group

(2 X 7 + 15)

(9 X 8 - 12)

(73 - 15 X 3)

At own pace

Low Efficacy Group

(2 X 7 + 15)

(9 X 8 - 12)

(73 - 15 X 3)

At preset, and difficult, pace -70

-60-50-40-30-20-10

010203040

High Efficacy

Low Efficacy

Change in self-perceived math

efficacy

Psychological Effects of Math-Test Manipulation

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

stress0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Time Pressure

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Percieved Impairment Due toTime Pressure

High Efficacy ConditionLow Efficacy Condition

Opiate Blockage

Purpose: If stress increases opiates, and opiates reduce pain, then ___High efficacy OR ___ Low efficacy condition will have higher pain thresholds (i.e., be better able to withstand pain longer)?

HOWEVER, if opiates are blocked, which group should have higher pain thresholds, ____ High efficacy OR ___ Low efficacy?X

X

To show this, need to block opiates to some subjects

Naloxone: Opiate antagonist; 100% effective

Subs get Naloxone or saline. Why saline?

Experiment Design and Predictions

High Efficacy

Low Efficacy

Saline Naloxone (Placebo) (Opiate Blocker)

Pain Threshold (Ability to Tolerate Hand in Freezing Water)

Moderate Moderate

High Tolerance Low Tolerance

0

5

10

15

20

25

High Efficacy Low Efficacy

Pain

Tol

eran

ce

PlaceboBlocker

Evidence that Efficacy ModeratesStress --> Illness Connection in Humans

Bandura, Cioffi, Taylor, & Brouillard, 1988

Health Outcomes Questions1. Compared to most other college students, what is your risk of an alcohol-

related injury?

2. Compared to most other college students, what is your risk of getting into a car accident?

Much Below

Average

Below Average

Slightly Below

Average

Average for

Rutgers students

SlightlyAbove

Average

Above Average

Much Above

Average

-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Much Below

Average

Below Average

Slightly Below

Average

Average for

Rutgers students

SlightlyAbove

Average

Above Average

Much Above

Average

-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Denial and Coping

Psychological defense: Minimize or deny existence of threat

Is denial good or bad? _______ Early in crisis

_______ Chronic (ongoing)

Good*

Bad

* Sometimes

On-going denial can stop people from taking necessary action.

NMAD = Near Miss Asthma Death

Who denies more: ___ Asthmatics who experienced NMAD

___ Regular Asthmatics

___ Non Asthmatics

X

0

1

2

3

4

5

NMAD Regular Asthma Normals

De

nia

l L

ev

el

Denial Among NMAD Survivors, “Regular” Asthmatics, and Non-Asthmatics

Yellowlees & Ruffin, 1989

0123456789

10

GHQ MHQ QOL HYPERVENT DENIAL

Rat

ing

Psych. Probs. Normals

Denial and Health Indices Among NMAD Survivors with or without Pre-existing Psychological Problems

Yellowlees & Ruffin, 1989

“He has been less violent since the attack. He plays

with me now by twisting my arm up my back as a joke

rather than by badly bruising me”.

Evidence of Improved Marital Relations Following NMAD

(????)

Optimists vs. Pessimists

Optimists

1. Expect positive outcomes2. Expect to cope with adversity

Pessimists

1. Expect negative outcomes2. Do not expect to cope with adversity

Joe Pessi Robert Optiheimer

I bombed the math test. I bombed the math test.

I just couldn't get myself to study. All the noise outside my apartment made it hard to study

A

I don't have good math ability, is what it is.

I didn't really try as hard as I could have.

B

Basically, I'm just not academically skilled.

Math is my one weak area. C

A. Internal vs. External CauseB. Stable vs. Transitory CauseC. Global vs. Specific Cause

Pessimistic vs. Optimistic Attribution Styles

Success Failure

Internal Cause

External Cause

Stable Cause

Optimist Pessimist

Optimist

OptimistPessimist

Pessimist

Transitory Cause Pessimist Optimist

Optimistic and Pessimistic Explanatory Styles

I won the tennis match because my opponent wasn’t trying hard.___Internal cause ___ External cause

I lost my keys because I'm such a flake.___Internal cause ___ External cause

I showed up late for my date because I didn’t plan far enough in advance..___ Stable Cause ___ Transitory Cause

I showed up late for my date because I am so bad at planning.___ Stable Cause ___ Transitory Cause

My cholesterol went up because I’m not exercising.___ Specific Cause ___ Global Cause

My cholesterol went up because I’m a lazy slob.___ Specific Cause ___ Global Cause

Explanatory Causes and Styles

X

X

X

X

X

X

Optimism Measure Scheier, M.F., Carver, C.S., & Bridges, M.W. (1994)

1. In uncertain times, I usually expect the best.

2. It's easy for me to relax. (Filler item)

3. If something can go wrong for me, it will. *

4. I'm always optimistic about my future.

5. I enjoy my friends a lot. (Filler item)

6. It's important for me to keep busy. (Filler item)

7. I hardly ever expect things to go my way. *

8. I don't get upset too easily. (Filler item)

9. I rarely count on good things happening to me.*

10. Overall, I expect more good things to happen to me than bad.

Kurt Lewin: Morale, Not Simply Optimism

Diagnosed with heart disease risk

I will improve heart health

Diagnosed with heart disease risk

I will improve heart health

I’ll sign up at a gym I’ll change diet

I’ll meet MD every 3 mos

Hope

Morale

C. Synder "Hope" Measure (Really a Measure of Morale)

P _____ 1. I can think of many ways to get out of a jam.A _____ 2. I energetically pursue my goals.F _____ 3. I feel tired most of the time.P _____ 4. There are lots of ways around any problem.F _____ 5. I am easily downed in an argument.P _____ 6. I can think of many ways to get the things in life that are most important to me.F _____ 7. I worry about my health.P _____ 8. Even when others get discouraged, I know I can find a way to solve my problem.A _____ 9. My past experiences have prepared me well for my future.A _____10. I've been pretty successful in life.F _____11. I usually find myself worrying about something.A _____12. I meet the goals that I set for myself.--------------------------A = Agency F = Filler P = Pathways

Prediction: Optimism and trait anxiety increased ambulatory BP

Subjects:100 volunteers, 50% female, ave. age = 3780% white, 10% black, 10% other

Procedure1. Pre-assessment

a. Resting BPb. Complete survey battery

1. Optimism (LOT)2. Trait anxiety3. Other background

2. Daily Monitoringa. Wear BP device, 3 days, activates every 30”b. Daily diary: Mood, Context (where, what doing,...)

Optimism, Pessimism, and Ambulatory BP Raikkonen, et al. (1999)

1. Optimism

Pessimists have higher BPMood affects only optimists

2. Trait AnxietyHigh anxious higher BPMood affects only low anxious

3. Conclusionsa. Results real, not due to posture, activity, etc.b. Chronic high BP is a health risk: can lead to

hypertensionc. Pessimists and high anxious may be at greater

long-term health riskd. NA is a real health risk, not just a “whining” artifact.

Results of Raikkonen, et al. (1999)

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

Pessimists Optimists

Pos Mood

Neg Mood

Fabricated Data for Illustration

Is Optimism Always a Good Thing?

Defined: Belief that one is immune from bad events, or that one will not be injured or harmed even when taking risks.

Arises from:

1. Easier to think up things that reduce risk than things that increase risk.

2. Lack of info about others' risk prevention efforts.

3. Egocentric dismissal of other's efforts to reduce risk.

Illusion of Invulnerability

GROUP 1 COMPLETE INFO.: ABOUT ME AND ABOUT OTHERSYour Risk Factor for Heart Attack Me Others

1. Cigarettes smoked per week _____ ( 8 )2. # Family members with heart ailments _____ ( 2 )3. Hours of exercise per week _____ ( 3 )

GROUP 2PARTIAL INFO: ABOUT ME ONLY, NO COMPARISON TO OTHERSYour Risk Factor for Heart Attack Me Others

1. Cigarettes smoked per week _____ ? 2. # Family members with heart ailments _____ ?3. Hours of exercise per week _____ ?

GROUP 3NO INFO: NO TRACKING OF SELF, NO COMPARISON TO OTHERS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Weinstein Unrealistic Optimism Study

All subjects next answer the following question:

Compared to other Rutgers students of my sex, my chances of having a heart attack are:

Much Below Average

Below Average

Slightly Below

Average

Average for Rutgers students

SlightlyAbove

Average

Above Average

Much Above

Average

-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Weinstein Unrealistic Optimism Study

-2

-1

0

1

2

Heart Attack Tooth Decay

Complete Info

Partial Info

No Info

Results of Weinstein Study

Health Outcomes Questions1. Compared to most other college students, what is your risk of an alcohol-

related injury?

2. Compared to most other college students, what is your risk of getting into a car accident?

Much Below

Average

Below Average

Slightly Below

Average

Average for

Rutgers students

SlightlyAbove

Average

Above Average

Much Above

Average

-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

Much Below

Average

Below Average

Slightly Below

Average

Average for

Rutgers students

SlightlyAbove

Average

Above Average

Much Above

Average

-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3

02468

101214161820

Much Below Below SlightlyBelow

Average SlightlyAbove

Above Much Above

Risk of Alcohol Injury, Compared to Most Students

n = 48 Mean = 2.46 Median = 2.00 Mode = 1 SD = 1.64