Wetherell Mark A, Craw Olivia, Smith Kenny, Smith Michael A
Psychobiology Research Group, Department of Psychology, Northumbria University Newcastle, UK.
School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh, UK.
Neurobiol Stress. 2017 May 10;7:68-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ynstr.2017.05.002. eCollection 2017 Dec.
In order to understand psychobiological responses to stress it is necessary to observe how people react to controlled stressors. A range of stressors exist for this purpose; however, laboratory stressors that are representative of real life situations provide more ecologically valid opportunities for assessing stress responding. The current study assessed psychobiological responses to an ecologically valid laboratory stressor involving multitasking and critical evaluation. The stressor elicited significant increases in psychological and cardiovascular stress reactivity; however, no cortisol reactivity was observed. Other socially evaluative laboratory stressors that lead to cortisol reactivity typically require a participant to perform tasks that involve verbal responses, whilst standing in front of evaluative others. The current protocol contained critical evaluation of cognitive performance; however, this was delivered from behind a seated participant. The salience of social evaluation may therefore be related to the response format of the task and the method of evaluation. That is, the current protocol did not involve the additional vulnerability associated with in person, face-to-face contact, and verbal delivery. Critical evaluation of multitasking provides an ecologically valid technique for inducing laboratory stress and provides an alternative tool for assessing psychological and cardiovascular reactivity. Future studies could additionally use this paradigm to investigate those components of social evaluation necessary for eliciting a cortisol response.
为了理解对压力的心理生物学反应，有必要观察人们对可控压力源的反应。为此存在一系列压力源；然而，代表现实生活情境的实验室压力源为评估压力反应提供了更具生态效度的机会。当前研究评估了对一种涉及多任务处理和批判性评估的具有生态效度的实验室压力源的心理生物学反应。该压力源引发了心理和心血管应激反应性的显著增加；然而，未观察到皮质醇反应性。其他导致皮质醇反应性的社会评价性实验室压力源通常要求参与者在评价他人面前站立时执行涉及言语反应的任务。当前方案包含对认知表现的批判性评估；然而，这是在坐着的参与者背后进行的。因此，社会评价的显著性可能与任务的反应形式和评估方法有关。也就是说，当前方案不涉及与面对面、亲自接触和言语表达相关的额外脆弱性。对多任务处理的批判性评估提供了一种诱导实验室压力的具有生态效度的技术，并为评估心理和心血管反应性提供了一种替代工具。未来的研究还可以使用这种范式来研究引发皮质醇反应所需的社会评价的那些组成部分。
