Hostinar Camelia E, Gunnar Megan R
Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota.
Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2013 Oct 1;22(5):400-406. doi: 10.1177/0963721413488889.
The field of psychobiology has two major theories for talking about stress and health: the allostatic load model, which grew out of biological and neuroscience approaches to understanding health and disease, and the adaptive calibration model, which developed out of an explicitly evolutionary-developmental framework. Both are based on assumptions that the brain coordinates a distributed and dynamic set of neural circuits that regulate behavior and stress physiology to help the organism adapt to the demands of the environment. Both models support the notion that experiences early in life are embedded into the regulation of stress systems in ways that shape the organism's future responses. These two paradigms differ in their emphasis on whether changes in how stress systems function are viewed as adaptive or maladaptive. The goal of this review is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each framework and to discuss some implications for future studies and for policy.
应变负荷模型,它源自生物学和神经科学对健康与疾病的理解方法;以及适应性校准模型,它产生于一个明确的进化发展框架。两者都基于这样的假设:大脑协调一组分布式且动态的神经回路,这些神经回路调节行为和应激生理,以帮助生物体适应环境需求。两种模型都支持这样的观点:生命早期的经历以塑造生物体未来反应的方式嵌入到应激系统的调节中。这两种范式在强调压力系统功能变化被视为适应性还是适应不良方面存在差异。本综述的目的是确定每个框架的优缺点,并讨论对未来研究和政策的一些启示。