Two Key Studies of Sociocultural Explanations of Stress (DP IB Psychology)
Revision Note
Key study one: Brunet et al. (2013)
Aim:
To examine if social support resources mediate the relationship between stress and physical activity in adolescents and young adults following treatment for cancer
Participants:
64 adolescents and young adults aged between 15 and 39 years (mean 28.8 years)
Most of the participants were female, single and Caucasian (of white European background)
They had either an undergraduate degree or higher degree from a university
Most of the participants were employed either full time or part time.
The mean time since their diagnosis was 2.9 years
All participants had completed their cancer treatment
Procedure:
An online questionnaire collected data on demographic and cancer-specific variables (type and stage of cancer, age at diagnosis, and types of treatment)
Participants also completed:
a ten-item perceived-stress scale
questions on perceived social support and social support group involvement
questions on physical activity
Results:
Stress was negatively correlated with perceived social support and also with social support group involvement
Stress was also negatively correlated with physical activity for those not in a social support group
There was no correlation between stress and physical activity for those in a social support group
Perceived social support did not have the same effect on physical activity
Conclusion:
Establishing social support groups may help to reduce stress and promote an active lifestyle in adolescents and young adults treated for cancer
Social support groups can reduce stress in young people after cancer treatment
Examiner Tips and Tricks
When discussing the effects of social support on stress, remember to operationalise the variable of social support (and so ensure construct validity): is it perceived social support, social support in the form of physical touch (hugs) or social support groups?
Evaluation of Brunet et al. (2013)
Strengths
Brunet et al’s findings were based on careful operationalisation of ‘social support’ and therefore this research had internal validity, based on construct validity
The results of this study can be applied to cancer care programmes, increasing support groups to help reduce the negative impact of stress and contribute to positive lifestyle changes
Limitations
Data on the nature and quality of the support groups was not collected and so the extent the support they provided is unknown, lowering the validity of the results
The online-recruited volunteer sample of mainly white females may not represent the target population of adolescents and young adults who have been treated for cancer
Key study two: Cohen et al. (2014)
Aim:
To examine the role of perceived social support in the form of receiving hugs in buffering against interpersonal stress-induced susceptibility to infectious disease
Participants:
A volunteer sample of 406 participants who were part of two earlier studies
Participants were aged between 18 and 55 years (mean age = 33.5 years)
The total sample was 46.3% female (53.7% male) and 38.4% non-White
Procedure:
Before the study participants underwent:
a physical exam and blood tests for baseline immunity to the common cold virus, to exclude those who had high immunity from a previous cold
a questionnaire collecting demographic details of age, gender, general health
a telephone questionnaire completed each evening to measure perceived social support, tension, stressors and the number of hugs received daily
Participants were exposed to the common cold virus via a nose spray
5 or 6 days later participants’ virus levels were measured in nasal secretions to see if they had become infected
One month later, more blood tests were taken: antibodies of four times or more the baseline measurement confirming infection
Results:
78% of participants became infected with the cold virus, and 31% of these met the criteria for clinical illness
Participants perceiving low social support and few hugs had a higher rate of infection after the viral exposure
Participants perceiving higher levels of social support, as shown through daily hugs, had a lower rate of infection
The lower rate of infection with perceived social support remained even if participants also reported tension and stressors
Those with perceived social support also had fewer cold symptoms
Conclusion:
Perceived social support, especially in the form of physical hugs, can act as a buffer against stress and subsequent illness
Evaluation of Cohen et al. (2014)
Strengths
The findings have important implications for understanding the roles of stress, support, and hugs in response to other viral illnesses
This was a well-controlled study, as only participants with low levels of immunity to the cold virus prior to viral exposure were accepted, and so the findings have internal validity
Limitations
Even though the participants were quarantined immediately after exposure to the cold virus, a third variable (such as their personal reaction to this isolation) could have increased or decreased likelihood of infection
The study used self-report measures to identify tenson, stressors and number of daily hugs and so the data may have been subject to social desirability bias, reducing the validity of the findings
Worked Example
The question is: ‘Discuss one or more sociocultural explanations for one or more health problems.’ [22]
The command term “discuss” requires you to offer a considered and balanced review of the explanation that social support reduces the effects of stress. Opinions or conclusions should be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.. Here are two paragraphs for guidance.
Medical professionals have been aware for some time that social support from family and friends tends to relieve the stress of illness, or just the stress of everyday life. For stress is itself a health problem, as well as also being responsible for other health issues, such as cardiovascular disease. Psychologists have operationalised social support differently, depending on the focus of their research. Brunet et al. (2013) separated social support into perceived social support from friends and family and social support groups, in order to identify if each of these played a different role for young people in recovery from cancer. The research examined whether each of these types of social support affected the stress levels and in turn also mediated the link between stress and physical activity. They found that both were negatively correlated with stress, with both perceived social support and engagement with a social support group being associated with lower stress levels. However, only attendance at the social support group meant that there was no significant correlation between high stress levels and a lack of physical activity. Those who engaged with a social support group were more likely to be physically active, regardless of their stress levels.
This would seem to be conclusive evidence for the benefit of social support, both perceived social support and support through engagement with a social support group. However, the research is cross-sectional, rather than longitudinal, so we do not know if this is a benefit that is maintained. Moreover, the quality of the social support offered by groups was not measured, so it cannot be assumed that all are equally beneficial. Also, most of the participants were young female Caucasian adults who had access to the internet and were self-referring and willing to complete an online survey. This limits the generalizability of the results to particular sex and ethnicity of adolescents and young adults treated for cancer who have access to a computer with a connection to the internet. Until these results have been replicated with other adolescents and young people their external validity remains in question
You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week
Sign up now. It’s free!
Did this page help you?