The Intersections of Race, Gender, Age, and Socioeconomic Status: Implications for Reporting Discrimination and Attributions to Discrimination.

This study employed an intersectional approach (operationalized as the combination of more than one social identity) to examine the relationship between aspects of social identity (i.e., race, gender, age, SES), self-reported level of mistreatment, and attributions for discrimination. Self-reported discrimination has been researched extensively and there is substantial evidence of its association with adverse physical and psychological health outcomes. Few studies, however, have examined the relationship of multiple demographic variables (including social identities) to overall levels self-reported mistreatment as well the selection of attributions for discrimination. A diverse community sample (N = 292; 42.12% Black; 47.26% male) reported on experiences of discrimination using the Everyday Discrimination Scale. General linear models were used to test the effect of sociodemographic characteristics (i.e., race, gender, age, SES) on total discrimination score and on attributions for discrimination. To test for intersectional relationships, we tested the effect of two-way interactions of sociodemographic characteristics on total discrimination score and attributions for discrimination. We found preliminary support for intersectional effects, as indicated by a significant race by age interaction on the selection of the race attribution for discrimination; gender by SES on the age attribution; age by gender on the education attribution; and race by SES on the economic situation attribution. Our study extends prior work by highlighting the importance of testing more than one factor as contributing to discrimination, particularly when examining to what sources individuals attribute discrimination

Rumination as a Mediator of Chronic Stress Effects on Hypertension: A Causal Model

Chronic stress has been linked to hypertension, but the underlying mechanisms remain poorly specified. We suggest that chronic stress poses a risk for hypertension through repeated occurrence of acute stressors (often stemming from the chronic stress context) that cause activation of stress-mediating physiological systems. Previous models have often focused on the magnitude of the acute physiological response as a risk factor; we attempt to extend this to address the issue of duration of exposure. Key to our model is the notion that these acute stressors can emerge not only in response to stressors present in the environment, but also to mental representations of those (or other) stressors. Consequently, although the experience of any given stressor may be brief, a stressor often results in a constellation of negative cognitions and emotions that form a mental representation of the stressor. Ruminating about this mental representation of the stressful event can cause autonomic activation similar to that observed in response to the original incident, and may occur and persist long after the event itself has ended. Thus, rumination helps explain how chronic stress causes repeated (acute) activation of one's stress-mediating physiological systems, the effects of which accumulate over time, resulting in hypertension risk

Revisiting the lack of association between affect and physiology: Contrasting between-person and within-person analyses.

ObjectiveDespite experimental manipulations that reliably elicit affective and physiological responses, the relationship between the two frequently appears small or nonexistent. We propose that this is, at least in part, due to a mismatch between the nature of the question being asked and the analytic methods applied. For example, to test if levels of affect reliably covary with physiology over time-a within-person question-one cannot apply analytic approaches that test whether people are similarly reactive across domains-a between-person question. The purpose of this paper is to compare within-person and between-person analyses testing the association between affect and physiology.MethodParticipants (N = 60) recalled an event from their lives that made them angry. Self-reported anger and objective blood pressure levels were recorded at baseline, after the recall, and 5 times during recovery.ResultsBetween-person correlations between anger and blood pressure were nonsignificant across all phases of the study, suggesting that those least/most reactive for anger were not least/most reactive for blood pressure. These null findings held regardless of whether linear or nonlinear assumptions were modeled. In contrast, within-person multilevel modeling indicated a clear relationship, suggesting that when a person was angrier that person's blood pressure was higher compared with when that person was less angry.ConclusionResults suggest the importance of appropriately matching analytic strategy to the nature of the question regarding the relationships between affect and physiology. Implications for past and future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Recor

Computing Components of Everyday Stress Responses: Exploring Conceptual Challenges and New Opportunities

Repeated assessments in everyday life enables collecting ecologically valid data on dynamic, within-persons processes. These methods have widespread utility and application and have been extensively used for the study of stressors and stress responses. Enhanced conceptual sophistication of characterizing intraindividual stress responses in everyday life would help advance the field. This article provides a pragmatic overview of approaches, opportunities, and challenges when intensive ambulatory methods are applied to study everyday stress responses in “real time.” We distinguish between three stress-response components (i.e., reactivity, recovery, and pileup) and focus on several fundamental questions: (a) What is the appropriate stress-free resting state (or “baseline”) for an individual in everyday life? (b) How does one index the magnitude of the initial response to a stressor (reactivity)? (c) Following a stressor, how can recovery be identified (e.g., when the stress response has completed)? and (d) Because stressors may not occur in isolation, how can one capture the temporal clustering of stressors and/or stress responses (pileup)? We also present initial ideas on applying this approach to intervention research. Although we focus on stress responses, these issues may inform many other dynamic intraindividual constructs and behaviors (e.g., physical activity, physiological processes, other subjective states) captured in ambulatory assessment

Real-Time Associations Between Engaging in Leisure and Daily Health and Well-Being

BackgroundEngagement in leisure has a wide range of beneficial health effects. Yet, this evidence is derived from between-person methods that do not examine the momentary within-person processes theorized to explain leisure's benefits.PurposeThis study examined momentary relationships between leisure and health and well-being in daily life.MethodsA community sample (n = 115) completed ecological momentary assessments six times a day for three consecutive days. At each measurement, participants indicated if they were engaging in leisure and reported on their mood, interest/boredom, and stress levels. Next, participants collected a saliva sample for cortisol analyses. Heart rate was assessed throughout the study.ResultsMultilevel models revealed that participants had more positive and less negative mood, more interest, less stress, and lower heart rate when engaging in leisure than when not.ConclusionsResults suggest multiple mechanisms explaining leisure's effectiveness, which can inform leisure-based interventions to improve health and well-being

Rumination is independently associated with poor psychological health: Comparing emotion regulation strategies.

ObjectiveEmotion regulation (ER) strategies are related to psychological health, with most work examining reappraisal and suppression. Yet, emerging findings suggest that rumination may have stronger relationships with psychological health, namely depression, than other ER strategies. This paper replicated and extended this work by testing whether rumination was independently associated with a range of poor psychological health risk indicators and outcomes. In addition, it explored whether the reason why rumination is so deleterious to health is because it underlies the stress-health relationship.DesignParticipants (n = 218) completed measures online.Main outcome measuresSurveys assessed ER strategies (reappraisal, suppression, proactive coping, emotion support seeking, and rumination), health risk indicators (hostility, optimism, self-esteem), health outcomes (depression, poor sleep quality, anxiety) and perceived chronic stress.ResultsMultivariate regression analyses revealed rumination as the only ER strategy with a consistent independent effect on all the health risk indicators and outcomes. Bootstrapping analyses revealed indirect effects of perceived chronic stress on all the health variables via rumination.ConclusionRumination had a deleterious relationship with psychological health, perhaps because rumination underlies the relationship between stress and psychological health. Results have implications for interventions, particularly emphasizing the need to target ruminative thinking after stressful experiences