Stress reactivity and vulnerability to depressed mood in college students
Introduction
The assumption that stress accumulates over time to cause or trigger episodes of disorder (Rabkin & Struening, 1976) has guided research in stress and health for over three decades. It was a guiding principle in the pioneering development of the Social Readjustment Rating Scale (Holmes & Rahe, 1967) and subsequent life events inventories, which measure cumulative stress from exposure to minor and major events requiring adaptive responses. Sufficient stress to trigger disorder may accumulate from exposure to one or more very stressful events or a greater number of less stressful events. Many studies have supported this model by demonstrating reliable, but generally modest correlations between cumulative life events stress and negative physical and psychological health outcomes (Johnson & Sarason, 1979).
More recent efforts to assess stress have often employed “hassles” inventories, which measure stress from commonly occurring, minor stressors. There are theoretical and practical reasons for this approach. Many researchers found that major stressors occurred too infrequently to account for most of the stress that people experienced. Furthermore, many researchers study stress and outcomes in convenience samples such as college students, who generally experience few major stressors and little serious disorder, but frequent minor stressors, negative mood states, and deficits in performance. Hassles inventories are also based on the assumption that stress accumulates to cause or trigger negative outcomes. This approach has been successful and many studies found cumulative stress from minor stressors was a stronger predictor of physical and psychological disorder than stress from major life events, even when the same studies employed both measures of stress (DeLongis et al., 1982, Kanner et al., 1981, Monroe, 1983).
Hassles and life events inventories differ primarily in the nature of events listed. Life events inventories include items that cover a broader range of potential stress and required adaptation. Although the cognitive-transactional model of stress (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) posits that individuals may vary greatly in appraising the stressfulness of any event, life events inventories include some items that most people might rate as slightly stressful and some items that most people might rate as extremely stressful. Individuals could achieve high cumulative stress scores by experiencing one or more very stressful events or a greater number of less stressful events. In contrast, and consistent with their name, hassles inventories do not contain any items that most people would consider especially stressful. They were developed in response to the hypothesis that the cumulative effect of frequent exposure to everyday stressors could trigger disorder. Yet, some hassles inventories allow respondents to rate minor stressors as extremely stressful and some respondents do so. Brantley and Jones (1989) suggested that individuals who rate minor stressors as very stressful may be dispositionally or temporarily more vulnerable to stressors and less able to cope. They might be expected to accumulate stress more quickly and be more likely to experience negative affective states than individuals who rate minor stressors as less stressful. It is also possible, however, that such individuals by virtue of their vulnerabilities to stress, may experience greater negative affect even if they do not accumulate more total stress.
Felsten (2002) tested this hypothesis by measuring mean stress per stressor (stress reactivity) and total stress in response to minor stressors, and found stress reactivity was the stronger predictor of depressed mood in college women. Reactivity was also moderately correlated with neuroticism, a stable dimension of personality associated with ineffective coping, vulnerability to stress, poor adjustment, and negative affect (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Based on this association, the author suggested that greater stress reactivity in response to minor stressors might be a stable marker for vulnerability to stress and a predictor of negative outcomes. The study was limited in that it included only women, did not evaluate associations between stress reactivity and personality in detail, and provided no actual test of the stability of stress reactivity. The present report addressed those limitations by reevaluating archival data, some of which have been previously published (Felsten, 1996a, Felsten, 1996b). These archival data contain measures appropriate for addressing the issues described above, but were not previously used in that manner.
Study 1 was a reanalysis of some of the published data from a cross-sectional study (Felsten, 1996a) used to evaluate expressive and neurotic hostility in the context of the five-factor model of personality (Costa and McCrae, 1992, McCrae and John, 1992). The reanalysis permitted evaluation of how strongly total stress and stress reactivity predicted depressed mood in men and women and also allowed a more detailed evaluation of personality correlates of stress reactivity. Data from the hostility inventory were not used in the reanalysis.
Section snippets
Participants
Participants included 100 women and 63 men who were undergraduate students at a small campus of a public university in the Midwest. Mean age was 23.6 years (S.D.=6.0) for men and 25.9 years (S.D.=9.0) for women. Almost all students were White and many were nontraditional students who worked for pay and/or were married. Participants provided informed consent.
NEO PI-R
The revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992) is a 240-item self-report questionnaire used to assess the five major domains
Results
Descriptive statistics appear in Table 1. Men and women did not differ on most variables, but women scored higher than men on stress reactivity, t(161)=2.6, P<0.05, neuroticism, t(161)=2.5, P<0.05, and agreeableness, t(161)=3.4, P<0.01. Women scored higher than men on three neuroticism facets (anxiety, depression, and vulnerability to stress) and four agreeableness facets (straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, and modesty). Although most scores for depressed mood were low, 18.4% of
Participants
Forty undergraduate students at a small, private college in the Northeast provided complete data for this reanalysis. Participants included 17 men, 21 women, and two students who did not indicate gender. All students attended school full-time; most were 18–21 years of age, White, and from middle and upper-middle class families. All students provided informed consent.
Materials and procedure
Students completed the Daily Stress Inventory (Brantley & Jones, 1989) and the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck & Steer, 1987) four
Results
Mean scores for the monthly measures of stress and depressed mood in men and women appear in Table 4. Independent samples t-tests found no gender difference for any measure and data were combined for further analyses. Repeated measures analysis of variance (using the Greenhouse-Geisser epsilon to correct for violations of sphericity) found overall differences across assessments in number of stressors F(3, 117)=30.1, P<0.001, total stress F(3, 117)=17.0, P<0.001), and depressed mood F(3,
Discussion
The cross-sectional and prospective studies reported here found that in response to common, minor stressors, stress reactivity was a stronger predictor than total stress of depressed mood in college men and women. This extended an earlier finding that stress reactivity to minor stressors was the better predictor of depressed mood in college women (Felsten, 2002). As in the earlier report, these studies found depressed mood was more strongly correlated with stress reactivity than with total
References (26)
- et al.
Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventorytwenty-five years of evaluation
Clinical Psychology Reviews
(1988) - et al.
Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: a revision of the NEO Personality Inventory
Personality and Individual Differences
(1991) Hostility, stress, and symptoms of depression
Personality and Individual Differences
(1996)- et al.
Suicide risk assessmenta review of risk factors for suicide in 100 patients who made severe suicide attempts: evaluation of suicide risk in a time of managed care
Psychosomatics
(1999) - et al.
The Social Readjustment Rating Scale
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
(1967) - et al.
Differences in daily stress, mood, coping, and eating behavior in binge eating and nonbinge eating college women
Addictive Behaviors
(2000) - et al.
Minor depressiona review of the literature
International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine
(1996) - et al.
Beck Depression Inventory manual
(1987) - et al.
Manual for the Daily Stress Inventory
(1989) - et al.
A daily stress inventorydevelopment, reliability, and validity
Journal of Behavioral Medicine
(1987)