Comparing multidimensional facets of stress with social, emotional, and physical well-being using ecological momentary assessment among a Hispanic sample

Examining how morning stress forecasts relate to subsequent ecological momentary assessments of stress and coping

Stress forecasting is the cognitive process of anticipating and preparing to respond to future stress experiences based on one's own perceived future stress. Though it may seem intuitive that stress forecasting predicts stress, competing theories exist that indicate the relationship is not so inherent. In this paper we conducted two studies which both examine the relationships between stress forecasting and day stress, examining two different stress domains (appraisal and coping). Participants in Study 1 (n = 143 working adults) and Study 2 (n = 60 undergraduate students) completed 4 and 14 days, respectively, of ecological momentary assessment reports of stress appraisal forecasting, stress coping forecasting, stress appraisal reports, and stress coping reports, for a combined total of 5280 completed assessments. Exploratory analysis in Study 2 examined the importance of morning forecast discrepancy in relation to evening recalls of day stress. Results indicate that within domain (e.g., stress appraisal to appraisal reports), or domain specific, stress forecasting is predictive of day stress, and that across domains (e.g., stress appraisal to coping reports), or domain crossover, was consistent between stress appraisal forecasting and stress coping reports. Results suggest that magnitude of bias and day outlook (i.e., being either optimistic or pessimistic) about one's coping ability matters for day stress outcomes. Findings have implications for developing challenge-based thinking interventions and further understanding cognitive processes for building stress management strategies.

Specific emotion regulation difficulties and executive function explain the link between worry and subsequent stress: A prospective moderated mediation study

BACKGROUND

Worry is a transdiagnostic risk factor for stress-related mental health complaints such as anxiety, depression, and insomnia. Although worry may function as a form of avoidance of unwanted emotions and accordingly interfere with adaptive emotion regulation, the specific domains of emotion regulation that are perturbed by excessive worry to confer risk for stress-related symptoms are unclear. Further, it is unknown if cognitive control mechanisms that underlie successful emotion regulation influence the effect of worry on stress. The present study addressed these gaps in the literature by examining specific emotion regulation difficulties as mediators of the relationship between worry and subsequent stress, as well as executive function as a moderator of the mediated effects.

METHOD

656 community adults were assessed for trait worry, emotion dysregulation, stress, and executive dysfunction once per month for three months (time 1 - time 3).

RESULTS

The effect of worry (time 1) on subsequent stress (time 3) was partially mediated by difficulties with emotional clarity and difficulty engaging in goal-directed behavior when upset (time 2) after controlling for age, gender, and baseline stress. Moderated mediation models revealed that the indirect effect of worry on stress via difficulty with goal-directed behavior was significantly moderated by executive dysfunction, such that fewer executive function difficulties acted as a buffer against the harmful effects of worry.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include reliance on self-report measures, lack of experimental manipulation, and a nonclinical sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings point to specific domains of emotion regulation as treatment targets for individuals with high worry proneness.

Using Ecological Momentary Assessments to Study How Daily Fluctuations in Psychological States Impact Stress, Well-Being, and Health

Despite great interest in how dynamic fluctuations in psychological states such as mood, social safety, energy, present-focused attention, and burnout impact stress, well-being, and health, most studies examining these constructs use retrospective assessments with relatively long time-lags. Here, we discuss how ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) address methodological issues associated with retrospective reports to help reveal dynamic associations between psychological states at small timescales that are often missed in stress and health research. In addition to helping researchers characterize daily and within-day fluctuations and temporal dynamics between different health-relevant processes, EMAs can elucidate mechanisms through which interventions reduce stress and enhance well-being. EMAs can also be used to identify changes that precede critical health events, which can in turn be used to deliver ecological momentary interventions, or just-in-time interventions, to help prevent such events from occurring. To enable this work, we provide examples of scales and single-item questions used in EMA studies, recommend study designs and statistical approaches that capitalize on EMA data, and discuss limitations of EMA methods. In doing so, we aim to demonstrate how, when used carefully, EMA methods are well poised to greatly advance our understanding of how intrapersonal dynamics affect stress levels, well-being, and human health.

Establishing an index for monitoring occupational health and well-being of coal mines: Consideration of individual characteristics

It is crucial to enhance employee occupational health and well-being (OHW) for the well-run and prosperity of the industry, but there is very limited knowledge on the assessment of miners' well-being that differs from person to person. Within this study, a new more direct method, as well as an instrument was constructed to measure the OHW through data analysis based on a representative sample of coal miners (N = 1037). Initially, the causal pathway of job stress and health consequences was characterized by the driving force-pressure-state-impact-response (DPSIR) model. The OHW index was represented by hazards, vulnerability, and severity through the data envelopment analysis and stochastic frontier approach method. The result was that the severity of the consequences of inadequate organizational response was the dominant factor. 75% of employees with poor OHW work in mining, and digging areas, including various drivers and support workers. This study provides an innovative and complete description of the interaction mechanisms among job stress, job burnout, and health outcomes. It demonstrates that a three-level assessment method, namely hazards-vulnerability-severity, can effectively identify hierarchical management points. We provide metrics, objective data, and evidence-based recommendations on stress and health management for miners.