|





 
@ 1. Physiological
@ 2. Psychological
@ 3. Behavioural
Physiological
@ One way to assess arousal is to use
electrical/mechanical equipment to take
measurements of blood pressure, heart rate,
respiration rate, or galvanic skin response (G. S.
R.). The Polygraph measures all of these
simultaneously. Miniature Polygraphs can be
carried around. Researchers using a miniature
Polygraph were able to find that ambulance
workers had higher blood pressure whilst at
work compared with when they were at home
(Goldstein et al. 1992). However, being wired to
a polygraph could increase stress.
Polygraph test
Blood or urine samples
@ Blood or urine samples can be assessed for the
level of hormones that the adrenal glands
secrete. There are two main classes of
hormones: corticosteroids (for example cortisol)
and catecholamines (for example, adrenaline
and noradrenaline. Measurements need to be
analysed by a chemist using special procedures
and equipment. However, having blood taken
could cause stress.
£valuation
@ There are several advantages to using
measures of physiological arousal to assess
stress. Physiological measures are reasonably
direct and objective, quite reliable, and easily
quantified. The disadvantages are that the
techniques are expensive, the technique is
stressful for some people and the measures are
affected by factors such as gender, weight,
activity prior to measurement and such
substances as caffeine. Psychological stress
does not always produce physiological arousal.
Psychological

@ Life events
@ See separate handout
Psychological
@ The most widely used scale of life events has
been the 'social readjustment rating scale
(SRRS.)' developed by Holmes and Rahe
(1967). The scale was made by constructing a
list of events that were derived from clinical
experience. Hundreds of men and women of
various ages and backgrounds rated the amount
of readjustment needed by people experiencing
each of the stressful events. They were asked to
give the average degree of readjustment.
Holmes and Rahe (1967)

@ |

 
 



  





 






 






 



 
| 
 

 

 


 

  


 


 
Holmes and Rahe (1967)
@ [



 

 

 



 

 







 

 

 








 




 
 
!



"
 


 
| 
 

 
#




$ 



$
%& '!
$ 








 
 


$
% '!



$



$
% '

Holmes and Rahe (1967)

@ | 

 


 





 


 
 

 



 




 


 !
!


 
  

 








 




 


 
%( 
)
*  !
+",'
Problems with the scale
@ Major life events are rare therefore low
scores
@ Some items are ambiguous. Items in the
SRRS are vague or ambiguous (Hough et al,
1976). For example, "change in
responsibilities at work" does not take into
account how much change or whether there
is more or less responsibility. "Personal injury
or illness" does not take into account the
seriousness of the illness. This reduces the
precision of the instrument.
Problems with the scale
@ Value of items vary depending on what
group the respondent belongs to.
@ Large individual differences in ability to
cope
@ Large cultural differences in our
experience of events.
@ Value of events change over time. So
text loses its validity.
Problems with the scale
@ A weakness of the SRRS is that there is
a poor correlation (about .30) between
the score and illness (Dohrenwend &
Dohrenwend, 1981). One reason could
be that there are other many possible
reasons for why people get sick and
have accidents.
Problems with the scale
@ The scale does not consider the meaning or
impact of an event for the individual (Cohen
et al, 1983). For example, two people who
each had a mortgage for 20,000 dollars
would get the same score for "mortgage over
10,000 dollars" even though one of them
made ten times the income of the other. The
amount of stress caused by the "death of
spouse" could depend upon the age,
dependence on the spouse, and the length
and happiness of the marriage. This again
reduces the precision of the instrument.
Problems with the scale
@ The scale does not distinguish between
desirable and undesirable events. "Marriage"
or "outstanding personal achievement" are
often viewed as desirable; but "sex
difficulties" and "jail term" are obviously seen
as undesirable. Some items can be viewed
either way, for example, "change in financial
state"; the score is the same regardless of
whether the finances improve or worsen.
Studies have found that undesirable life
events are correlated with illness, but
desirable events are not (McFarlane et al,
1983).
£valuation
@ High correlation between men and women,
Catholics and Protestants. Not so high for
Black Vs White.
@ The SRRS has face validity because many of
the events listed are easily recognisable as
stressful events. The values Allocated to
each stress event have been carefully
calculated from data provided by the opinions
of many people. The survey form can be filled
out easily and quickly.
Daily hassles

@ Kanner et al (1981) - minor stressors and

pleasures of everyday life might have a
more significant effect on health than the
big events. - Takes account of the
cumulative nature of stress.
Daily hassles

@ Richard Lazarus and his associates

designed this scale. It concentrates on
recent stressors, the annoying things that
happened to everybody everyday. The
hassles are rated as having been
"somewhat," "moderately," or "extremely"
severe.
Daily Hassles

@ 100 middle-aged adults were tested

monthly over a nine-month period. The 10
most frequent hassles reported were:
‡ Concerns about weight
‡ Health of a family member
‡ Rising prices of common goods
‡ Home maintenance
‡ Too many things to do
‡ Misplacing or losing things.
‡ Outside home maintenance
Daily Hassles
‡ Property, investment or taxes
‡ Crime
‡ Physical appearance
plifts scale

@ In addition to the hassles scale there is

another instrument, the uplifts scale, which
measures the good events in life. It is
reasonable to assume that experiencing
events that bring peace, satisfaction, or joy
would allow people to endure the hassles
of daily life. plifts experienced in the past
month are recorded on a three-point scale.
plifts scale

@ The uplifts are rated as having been

"somewhat," "moderately," or "extremely"
strong. The 10 most frequent uplifts
reported were:
‡ Relating well to spouse or lover
‡ Relating well with friends
‡ Completing a task
‡ Feeling healthy
‡ Getting enough Sleep
‡ £ating out
plifts scale
‡ Meeting your responsibilities
‡ Visiting, phoning or writing to someone
‡ Spending time with the family
‡ Home pleasing to you
Hassles, plifts and Life events

@ One study tested middle-aged adults,

using 4 instruments:
‡ The hassles scale
‡ The uplifts scale
‡ A life events scale that includes no desirable items
‡ The health status Questionnaire, containing questions
about general health (Delongis et al., 1982).
Hassles, plifts and Life events

@ There is a weak correlation between

hassles scores and health status, as well
as between life event scores and health
status. Hassles were more strongly
associated with health than life events.
There was no association found between
uplifts scores and health status for men,
but there was for women.
Test - re-test reliability

@ Self-report measures of life events are

unreliable. A study had subjects fill out a
scale regarding life events they
experienced during the prior year. The
subjects then filled out the same
Questionnaire every month for a year.
Towards the end of the year the reports
were quite different from the ones made at
the beginning of the year (Raphael, et al.
1991).
 
   




@ Above methods only provide a snapshot.

Stress varies from day to day.
@ Gulian et al (1990) - study of British
drivers. Completed psychometric tests
(e.g. Rotter's Internal - £xternal Locus of
Control Scale).
@ Also filled in a diary of their feelings while
driving over 5 days.


@ More stress in the evening and midweek.

@ Stress varied with age and experience,
health condition, sleep quality, driving
conditions, driver's perception of driving as
stressful.
Douglas et al (1988)

@ Douglas et al (1988) used diary and

physiological measures
100 fire fighters from 12 stations.
@ Heart rate recorded for minimum of 48
hours (used portable electrocardiogram)
Douglas et al (1988)

@ Results yielded a 'Ventricular cardiac

strain score'.
@ High scores were found to correspond with
number of call-outs, level of seniority, and
stressful events recorded in diaries.
The end