Cli. 2 Stress Flashcards
(58 cards)
Johansson - BACKGROUND?
Workplace stress - combined
Stress - reaction to excessive pressures (worry we can’t cope)
3 main factors:
-task related (information overload)
-interpersonal (role conflicts)
-environmental (temperature)
Health related mental illness - £28bn (¼ UK sick bill)
Stress can cause mental/physical illness
Johansson - AIM?
Workplace stress - combined
Investigate which stressors increase stress related physiological arousal and stress related illness
Johansson - SAMPLE?
Workplace stress - combined
24 workers in Swedish sawmill:
- high risk - 14 (complex, computer paced jobs)
- low risk - 10 (cleaners, maintenance)
Johansson - METHOD?
Workplace stress - combined
Quasi
High risk job or control (low risk)
Johansson - PROCEDURE?
Workplace stress - combined
High risk group (14 finishers):
-worked in final stage of processing timber
-machine paced, isolated, respective and highly skilled
-productivity determined wage rates of entire factory
Compared with low risk group (10 cleaners):
-more varied, self paced and allowed socialising with other workers
Johansson - DATA?
Workplace stress - combined
Stress related hormone (adrenaline and noradrenaline) - in urine Records of days off sick due to stress Self report - mood and alertness Caffeine and nicotine consumption Body temperature
Johansson - RESULTS?
Workplace stress - combined
2x stress hormones (adrenaline and noradrenaline) produced in high risk group (14 finishers) on work days than rest days
Higher levels of stress hormones, stress related illness (headaches) and absence from work than control group
Johansson - CONCLUSIONS?
Workplace stress - combined
Combination of work stressors (repetitiveness and machine paced) and high levels of responsibility lead to chronic (long term) physiological arousal
Leads to stress related illness and absence from work
Kanner - BACKGROUND?
Hassles and life events
Not all stress comes from major events - lesser events (giving presentation) can be stressful
Richard Lazarus developed scale to measure hassles - 117 events (minor annoyance to major problem)
Participants indicated which events took place and rated them - most common: health and too many things to do
Uplifts scale developed (for good things)
Kanner - AIM?
Hassles and life events
Compare ‘hassles and uplifts scale’ with ‘Berkman life events scale’ as predictors of physiological symptoms for stress
Kanner - SAMPLE?
Hassles and life events
100 people who completed health survey in 1965
From California
Mostly white and Christian
With adequate or above income
9th grade education minimum
216 initially contacted - 109 agreed (9 dropped out) = 100
Kanner - METHOD?
Hassles and life events
Repeated measures design
Completed ‘Hassles rating scale’ and ‘life events scale’
Psychological symptoms assessed using Hopkins symptom checklist and Bradburn morale scale
Kanner - PROCEDURE?
Hassles and life events
All tests sent out by post 1 month before the study:
- hassles rating for 9 months
- life events rating after 10 months
- hopkins symptom checklist (HSCL) and Bradburn morale scale every month (for 9 months)
Kanner - RESULTS?
Hassles and life events
Hassles consistent month to month
Men: life events correlated positively with hassles - negatively with uplifts
Women: the more life events, the more hassles and uplifts reported
Hassle frequency correlated positively with psychological symptoms (HSCL)
Hassles correlated positively more with psychological symptoms than life events
Kanner - CONCLUSIONS?
Hassles and life events
Hassles are a better predictor of psychological symptoms than life events
Hassles contribute to psychological symptoms no matter the life events
Kanner - EVALUATION?
Hassles and life events
-
Geer and Maisel - BACKGROUND?
Lack of control - physiological
People prefer predictable rather than unpredictable events
When we can control when an unpleasant event will stop - lower response (predict length)
Geer & Maisel - AIM?
Lack of control - physiological
To see if perceived control or actual control reduce stress to averse stimuli
Geer & Maisel - SAMPLE?
Lack of control - physiological
60 psychology undergraduates at New York university
Geer & Maisel - METHOD?
Lack of control - physiological
Lab
Shown photos of dead car crash victims
Stress levels measured by GSR (Galvanic Skin Response)
Heart rate measured through ECG monitoring
Independent measures - 3 groups:
Group 1:
-control over time looking at photo (could press button to skip)
-warning tone before photo
Group 2:
-warned photo would be 60 seconds apart (photos shown for 35 seconds)
-10 second warning tone before photo
-no control but knew what was happening
Group 3:
-told they would see photos and hear tones
-not given timings or control
Geer & Maisel - GROUPS?
Lack of control - physiological
Group 1:
-control over time looking at photo (could press button to skip)
-warning tone before photo
Group 2:
-warned photo would be 60 seconds apart (photos shown for 35 seconds)
-10 second warning tone before photo
-no control but knew what was happening
Group 3:
-told they would see photos and hear tones
-not given timings or control
Geer & Maisel - MEASURES?
Lack of control - physiological
GSR (Galvanic Skin Response) - finger grips with moisture sensors on the ends of the fingers
Moisture change can be recorded (after 5 minute baseline - calibrated to zero)
Geer & Maisel - PROCEDURE?
Lack of control - physiological
Seated in sound proofed room and wired to GSR and ECG machines (calibrated for 5 minutes - give baseline)
Instructions read over intercom
Photo preceded with 10 second warning tone and then shown for 35 seconds (except group 1)
GSR taken on onset of tone, halfway through tone and in repose to picture
Geer & Maisel - RESULTS?
Lack of control - physiological
ECG recordings discarded - appeared inaccurate
Most stress - group 2
Least stress - group 1
