Presentation on theme: "Lectures 5 Cardiovascular Reactivity. General reading in Health Psychology To make the most of this course you should read the relevant sections in one."— Presentation transcript:
General reading in Health Psychology To make the most of this course you should read the relevant sections in one of the recommended introductory texts, either Taylor or Sarafino. The sections below provide background for the first 4 lectures. They are fairly easy reading. In Taylor you should read Chapter 2 Systems of the body Pages 19-31 (nervous, endocrine and Cardiovascular systems). Chapter 6 Stress & Coping Complete Chapter (pages 178-215). In Sarafino the equivalent chapters are essentially Chapter 2 pages 32-33, 37- 42, 49- 53 & Chapters 3 & 4 (pages 61-138).
More Reading Another good general book is Baum, Gatchel and Krantz An introduction to Health Psychology, Chapters 2, 3 and 5. For those who wish to find out more about of Obrist and Brod (mentioned in Lecture 3) the references are below. Not required reading. Obrist,PA,Gaebelein,CJ,Teller,ES,Langer,AW,Grignolo,A,Light,KC, McCubbin,JA,(1978) The relationship among heart rate, carotid dp/dt and blood pressure in humans as a function of the type of stress Psychophysiology,15,102- 115 Brod J Fencl, V, Hejl, Z, Jirka, J (1959). Circulatory changes underlying blood pressure elevation during acute emotion stress (Mental arithmetic) in normotensive and hypertensive subjects. Clin Sci, 18, 269-279.
Cardiovascular Reactivity: Some reading The most cited reference on the topic of CV reactivity is Krantz DS & Manuck SB (1984). Acute psychophysiologic reactivity and risk of cardiovascular disease: a review and methodological critique. Psychol. Bull., 96, 435-464. This is essential reading for the course. It is demanding reading. The sections on CV disease will be relevant to later lectures. There was special section of Psychosomatic Medicine devoted to Cardiovascular Reactivity in 2003. Read Linden WL, Gerin & Davidson K (2003) Cardiovascular reactivity: Status Quo and a research agenda for the New Millennium. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 5-8
CV Reactivity Kamarck TW & Lovallo WR (2003) Cardiovascular reactivity to psychological challenge: conceptual and measurement issues. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 9-21. When discussing appraisal I shall lean heavily on the studies reported in: Tomaka, Blascovich, Kelsey & Leitten (1993) Subjective, physiological and behavioral effects of threat and challenge appraisal. J. Per. Soc. Psychol., 65, 248-260. Tomaka, Blaskovich, Kibler & Ernst (1997). Cognitive and physiological antecedents of threat and challenge appraisal J. Per. Soc. Psychol, 73, 63-72 Blascovich & Tomaka present a fuller account of their views in Blascovich & Tomaka (1996) The biopsychosocial model of arousal regulation. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 28, 1-51.
References on social support and cardiovascular reactivity Kamarck T (1992) Recent developments in the the study of cardiovascular reactivity: contributions from psychometric theory and social psychology. Psychophysiology, 29, 491-503. Lapore SJ et al, (1993) Social support lowers cardiovascular reactivity to an acute stressor. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55, 518-524. Lapore SJ (1995). Cynicism, social support and cardiovascular reactivity. Health Psychology, 14, 210- 216.
Manuck. Comparison of Cardiac & Vascular Reactors
Tomaka & Blascovich, following Lazarus & Folkman: 2 common stress related appraisals Threat : perception of danger greater than perception of coping abilities Challenge: perception of danger less than perception of coping Threat associated with negative emotions - However challenge associated with more CV activation (Obrist Active passive distinction) Tomaka & Blascovich attempt to clarify this. Task: Mental arithmetic (Active Coping) Threat: rating of threat greater than rating of ability to cope (Primary/Secondary). Challenge: rating of coping greater than rating of threat. After task ratings of experienced stress obtained.
3 studies, Study 1 preliminary. Study 2. Mental arithmetic. Subjects classified into threatened or challenged. Results Subjective & Behavioural Threat group More Stress 3.85 v 2.85 on 7 point scales Threat group performed less well 2.19 v 2.85 (self ratings) and produced less correct answers, 10.5 v 14.00 NB results most clear cut first time tasks carried out. Physiological ….
Tomaka et al (1997) Cont. They attempted to test causality of appraisal by 1.Manipulating appraisal. Exp 1, previous slide 2.Manipulating physiological response 1.Exp 2. Alter CO with exercise- no effect on appraisal 2.Exp 3. Alter TPR with cold pressor- no effect on appraisal