BIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY

1. The body's response to stress

   • Prepares the body for physical action
   • Adaptive response
     • preserves life
       • outweighs physical costs in response to the presence of danger
   • Autonomic Nervous System
     • Sympathetic Nervous System (SNS)
       • arouses body for Fight or Flight
         • increases heart rate
         • deepens breathing
     • Parasympathetic Nervous System (PNS)
       • returns the body to a state of relaxation
         • reverses action of SNS
     • activated in response to perception of stress
       • without conscious control
     • controls Flight or Flight response
   • Sympathomedullary Pathway (SAM)
     • Hypothalamus nervously triggers release of hormones-
       • Adrenaline
       • Noradrenaline
       • -from the core (adrenal medulla) of the adrenal gland
         • A.G located on top of kidneys
         • This boosts oxygen supplies
           • increases heart rate
           • relaxes bronchioles in the lungs
           • releases stored glucose from liver cells into blood stream
     • body prepares for Fight or Flight by activating SAM
     • activated in preparation for Fight or Flight
   • Hypothalamic-Pituitary Adrenal System (HPA)
     • Stressful stimuli cause hypothalamus to produce CRF
       • CRF stimulates Pituitary Gland to release ACTH
         • Adrenocortiotrophic Hormone
         • When ACTH reaches the adrenal cortex via the blood stream-
           • -it stimulates the release of corticosteroids
             • such as cortisol
             • They synthesize glucose from muscle protein-
               • -further boosting energy supplies
                 • Production of corticosteroids partially suppresses immune system
       • Corticotrophin Releasing Factor
     • In response to chronic stress

2. Stress-related Illness

   • Includes cardiovasular diseases of the heart and its supporting systems
     • e.g. atherosclerosis
       • thickening of arteries due to high levels of cholesterol in bloodstream
         • increases risk of cardiac arrest
   • Williams et al (2000)
     • 13,000 participants
     • Longitudinal study- 6 years
     • Found highs levels of reported anger significantly increased chances of having a heart attack
       • Suggests stress may lead to heart disease
     • However, self-report studies based on questionnaire findings are not reliable
       • Participants may misremember how angry they were
       • Some are more sensitive to effects of stress
         • respond with greater increases in blood pressure than others
           • leads to greater damage to cardiovasular system in hyper-responsive types
   • Includes mental illness, including depression
     • a severe mood disorder resulting from prolonged anxiety and loss
   • Brown and Harris (1978)
     • Found women suffering from the chronic stress of raising children+ being unemployed were more liely to get depressed
       • However they reported that chronic stress alone did not predict depression
         • Only women without a close confinding relationship were vulnerable to depression
     • Much research in this field is correlational
       • Involves reported experiences of participants that may not be reliable
       • Many other intervening variables unaccounted for in the data
         • e.g. unhealthy behaviours (drug-taking)
         • e.g. healthy behaviours (regular exercise)
         • moderate effects of stress on body
   • Stress-related Illness and the Immune System
     • Chronic stress is known to result in the lowering of immune function
       • Therefore we would expect to find a relationship between stress and illness
     • Immune System
       • A system of cells within the body concerned with fighting disease
         • These cells prevent illness by destroying invading anti-gens such as viruses and bacteria-
           • -and producing anti-bodies designed to prevent further infections
         • (including macrophages, T-cells, B-cells and natural killer cells)
     • Kiecolt-Glaser's Research
       • provides supporting evidence of effects of short and long-term stressors on the immune system
       • SHORT-TERM STRESSORS Kiecolt-Glaser et al (1984)
         • Took blood samples from medical students-
           • -one month before and on the first day of their final examinations
         • Number of natual killer cells ad T cells were measured-
           • -as indicator of immune functioning
         • It was found that immune cell activity declined over time
           • Immune response was especially surpressed in students who reported psychiatric symptoms, loneliness or stressful life events
             • Shows that short-term tress is associated with lowering of immune functioning
               • Effect is stronger where there are multiple sources of stress
         • However this was a natural experiment
           • Other variables betond the control of researchers may contribute to the suppression of the immune system e.g. smoking/drinking
       • LONG-TERM STRESSORS Kiecolt-Glaser et al (1995)
         • Used low wound healing as a measure of immune functioning
         • Used women who had been caring for a relation with Alzheimer's for at least 8 years
         • A small wound was made in the arm of participants, just above the elbow
         • The time for the woud to heal was on average 10 days longer with long-term caregivers than a contro group of women matched in age and income
           • Suggests the immune system of the caregivers was less efficient than that of the control women-
             • -and that long-term stress suppresses the workings of the immune system
         • However caregivers and controls differed in ways other than level of psychological stress
           • e.g. more caregivers were on medication
           • This may have affected their immune system
     • EVALUATION OF STRESS-RELATED ILLNESS AND THE IMMUNE SYSTEM
       • It's impractical to demonstrate a direct link between stress and well-being
         • General health is slow to change
         • Long-term research is expensive to conduct
       • It's difficult to draw a casual link between stress-related illness and immune functioning
         • Health and well-being is affected by many contributing variables that cannot be controlled for ethical reasons
           • e.g. life style choices (e.g choosing to smoke) and genetic vulnerability to certain illnesses
       • Individual differences impact on the stress response
         • Kiecolt-Glaser et al (2005)
           • found that women show more adverse hormonal and immunological to martial confilct than male spouses
         • Sergerstrom and Miller (2004)
           • found that age has an increasing adverse effect on the immune system
       • Sergerstrom and Miller (2004)
         • Meta-analysis of 293 studies
         • found that short-lived stressor (e.g.speaking in public) increase natual immunity (increase natural killer cells)-
           • - whereas stressful life events (e.g death of a partner) are associated with a reduction in the effectiveness of natural killer cells-
             • - as well as lowering specific immunity to particular infections
       • Immune system is extremely complex
         • Robles et al (2005)
           • Reported that chronic stress enhanced some aspects of immune functioning
             • Stress impairs the immune systems simply because there are adverse effects on certain small parts of its functioning

3. Sources of stress

   • LIFE CHANGES
     • Major life evens that require social readjustment to an individual's current way of life
       • Demand considerable psychological and physical change
     • Holmes and Rahe (1967)
       • Constructed the Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS)
         • Based on 43 life changes
           • from over 5000 patient records
       • 400 participants were asked to rate each life change for social readjustment
         • Scores averaged to produce life change units (LCU) for each life event
           • e.g. marriage is 50 LCU
       • Rahe et al (1970)
         • Tested hypothesis that there would be a positive correlation between the number of Life Changes and Physical Illness
           • Gave over 2700 American navy sailors the SRRS
             • Correlated number of Life Events they had experienced prior to a tour of duty against an illness score-
               • -based on medical records kept during the next 7 months
         • A positive correlation of 0.188 was found
           • Was concluded that there is a relationship between Life Changes and Physical Illness
             • Life Events are stressful
               • Require a period of social adjustement whether positive or negative in their immediate outcomes
     • EVALUATION
       • Research is correlational
         • unclear whether life events resulted in greater stress or vice versa
       • Certain personality types appear to be more susceptible to stress
         • It was found that individuals high in neuroticism are more likely to experience stressful life events
       • Findlay Jones and Brown (1981)
         • Found specific events lead to particular types of ilnness
           • Loss tends to lead to depression
           • Anxiety result from future threats
   • DAILY HASSLES
     • Delongis proposed that daily hassles were a greater source of stress than life events
       • Major life events expreienced rarely
       • Daily Hassles experienced dozen of times in one day
     • Delogis et al (1982)
       • Used Life Events Scale and own Hassles Scale to see which was better indicator of future health problems
         • considered how daily uplifts affect well-being
       • Participants tracked over a year
       • Found frequency and intensity of hassles significantly correlated with impaired overall health status and bodily symptoms
         • However daily uplifts had little effect on health
           • No relationship found between life events and health DURING study
             • BUT there was one for 2 years before the study
       • Participants were over 45
         • May be inappropriate to generalise findings to younger groups
       • Participants gave their data only once a month
         • Retrospective data known to be unreliable
           • Lowers validity of findings
       • Application of the findings to training in coping strategies
         • designed to minimise adverse effects of daily hassles on health (e.g. hardiness training)
       • Daily Hassles cannot be separated from an individual's experience of major life events
         • Johnson and Sherman (1997)
           • Found number of psychiatric symptoms reported by students experiencing major life events was greater-
             • -if they also had a substantial number of daily hassles
               • known as Amplification Effect
                 • when chronic stress due to major life events makes people more vulnerable to the effects of daily hassles

4. Workplace Stress

   • Effects of Workoverload
     • Johansson et al (1978)
       • Compared 2 groups of workers in a Swedish saw mill
       • Sawyers at end of production were identified as high risk-
         • -because they did repetitive work that was machine regulated
           • These physical constraints required continuous attention to their work
           • They had higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline than workers in same factory who worked under less pressured conditions
             • Suggests they experienced more need to mobilise their physiological coping resources than their less pressured colleagues
               • Suggests workload is one reason why they suffered from more stress-related illness-
                 • + had higher levels of absenteeism
   • Control
     • Marmot et al (1997)
       • Whitehall Study
       • studied a sample of over 7000 civil servants
         • working in London
           • aged 35-65
             • over a period of several years
       • Civil servants were asked to complete questionnaires on workload, job control and social support
         • also were checked for signs of stress-related illness
       • Workers with low job control 4 times more likely to die of heart attack than those with high job control
         • More likely to suffer from other stress-related e.g. cancer, stroke
           • Findings show low job control is associated with high stress, indicated by amount of stress-related illness
           • Assiociation found significant after other factors accounted for
             • e.g. social support, negative attitude towards employment
   • Stress levels generated in response to stressors within an individual's work environment potentially lead to illness and absenteeism
   • EVALUATION
     • Implications
       • Responsibility of employers to ensure employees have more freedom to manage the way they do their jobs
         • improves efficiency
         • improves general well-being of the workforce
     • Schubroeck et al (2001)
       • Found that some were less stressed in low control situations than others
         • Suggests that for some, control may actually exacerbate the unhealthy effects of stress

5. ·