The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Psychology, USA.
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Psychology, USA.
Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2018 Jun;92:113-122. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.11.002. Epub 2017 Nov 8.
Various internalizing risk factors predict, in separate studies, both augmented and reduced cortisol responding to lab-induced stress. Stressor severity appears key: We tested whether heightened trait-like internalizing risk (here, trait rumination) predicts heightened cortisol reactivity under modest objective stress, but conversely predicts reduced reactivity under more robust objective stress. Thus, we hypothesized that trait rumination would interact with a curvilinear (quadratic) function of stress severity to predict cortisol reactivity. Evidence comes from 85 currently non-depressed emerging adults who completed either a non-stressful control protocol (n = 29), an intermediate difficulty Trier Social Stress Test (TSST; n = 26), or a robustly stressful negative evaluative TSST (n = 30). Latent growth curve models evaluated relationships between trait rumination and linear and quadratic effects of stressor severity on the change in cortisol and negative affect over time. Among other findings, a significant Trait Rumination x Quadratic Stress Severity interaction effect for cortisol's Quadratic Trend of Time (i.e., reactivity, B = .125, p = .017) supported the hypothesis. Rumination predicted greater cortisol reactivity to intermediate stress (r = .400, p = .043), but blunted reactivity to more robust negative evaluative stress (r = -0.379, p = 0.039). Contrasting hypotheses, negative affective reactivity increased independently of rumination as stressor severity increased (B = .453, p = 0.044). The direction of the relationship between an internalizing risk factor (trait rumination) and cortisol reactivity varies as a function of stressor severity. We propose the Cortisol Reactivity Threshold Model, which may help reconcile several divergent reactivity literatures and has implications for internalizing psychopathology, particularly depression.
各种内化风险因素在独立的研究中预测,实验室诱发的应激会导致皮质醇反应增强或减弱。应激源的严重程度似乎是关键:我们测试了特质性内隐风险(这里是特质性反刍)是否会在适度的客观应激下预测皮质醇反应性增强,但相反,在更强烈的客观应激下预测反应性降低。因此,我们假设特质性反刍会与应激严重程度的曲线(二次)函数相互作用,从而预测皮质醇反应性。证据来自 85 名目前无抑郁的新兴成年人,他们完成了非压力控制方案(n=29)、中等难度的特里尔社会应激测试(TSST;n=26)或强烈的负性评价性 TSST(n=30)。潜在增长曲线模型评估了特质性反刍与应激源严重程度对皮质醇和负性情绪随时间变化的线性和二次效应之间的关系。除其他发现外,皮质醇二次时间趋势(即反应性)的特质性反刍 x 二次应激严重程度的显著交互效应(B=0.125,p=0.017)支持了这一假设。反刍预测了对中等应激的更大皮质醇反应性(r=0.400,p=0.043),但对更强烈的负性评价应激反应性降低(r=-0.379,p=0.039)。相反的假设是,随着应激源严重程度的增加,负性情绪反应性独立于反刍而增加(B=0.453,p=0.044)。一个内化风险因素(特质性反刍)与皮质醇反应性之间的关系的方向随着应激源严重程度的变化而变化。我们提出了皮质醇反应性阈值模型,该模型可能有助于协调几个不同的反应性文献,并对内隐性精神病理学有影响,特别是抑郁症。