Effects of sex, gender role identification, and gender relevance of two types of stressors on cardiovascular and subjective responses: sex and gender match and mismatch effects.

The authors tested the hypothesis that a match between the gender relevance of a stressor and one's sex or gender role identification would elicit higher cardiovascular responses. Healthy female and male undergraduates (n = 108) were exposed to two stressors: the Cold Pressor Test (CPT) and the n-back task. Stressor relevance was manipulated to be masculine or feminine relevant or gender neutral. Data were analyzed using a Bayesian model selection procedure. The results showed stronger cardiovascular responses for the CPT in the case of a gender match effect. In contrast, results for the n-back task revealed stronger cardiovascular responses for sex and gender mismatch effects. These discrepant match and mismatch effects are discussed in terms of differential task appraisal (i.e., threat vs. challenge). Additional results (a) support the success of measuring gender role identification indirectly by means of the Gender Implicit Association Test, (b) do not show that the effect of stressor relevance is more pronounced on those hemodynamic parameters typically increased by the stressor, and (c) reveal differential effects of stressor relevance for subjective and cardiovascular stress responses. Taken together, it can be concluded that the process of the cognitive appraisal of stressor relevance outlines individual variability in cardiovascular responding to acute stress.