Mark D. Seery

Whatever Does Not Kill Us: Cumulative Lifetime Adversity, Vulnerability, and Resilience

Exposure to adverse life events typically predicts subsequent negative effects on mental health and well-being, such that more adversity predicts worse outcomes. However, adverse experiences may also foster subsequent resilience, with resulting advantages for mental health and well-being. In a multiyear longitudinal study of a national sample, people with a history of some lifetime adversity reported better mental health and well-being outcomes than not only people with a high history of adversity but also than people with no history of adversity. Specifically, U-shaped quadratic relationships indicated that a history of some but nonzero lifetime adversity predicted relatively lower global distress, lower self-rated functional impairment, fewer posttraumatic stress symptoms, and higher life satisfaction over time. Furthermore, people with some prior lifetime adversity were the least affected by recent adverse events. These results suggest that, in moderation, whatever does not kill us may indeed make us stronger.

The relationship between self-esteem level, self-esteem stability, and cardiovascular reactions to performance feedback

The authors examined the notion that individuals with unstable high self-esteem possess implicit self-doubt. They adopted the framework of the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat and assessed spontaneous cardiovascular reactions in the face of success versus failure performance feedback. Study 1 revealed predicted interactions between feedback condition, self-esteem level, and self-esteem stability, such that participants with unstable high self-esteem exhibited relative threat (a negative reaction) in the failure condition, whereas those with stable high self-esteem exhibited relative challenge (a positive reaction). Study 2 replicated these results and provided additional evidence against plausible alternative explanations.

Resilience A Silver Lining to Experiencing Adverse Life Events

When adverse life events occur, people often suffer negative consequences for their mental health and well-being. More adversity has been associated with worse outcomes, implying that the absence of life adversity should be optimal. However, some theory and empirical evidence suggest that the experience of facing difficulties can also promote benefits in the form of greater propensity for resilience when dealing with subsequent stressful situations. I review research that demonstrates U-shaped relationships between lifetime adversity exposure and mental health and well-being, functional impairment and health care utilization in chronic back pain, and responses to experimentally induced pain. Specifically, a history of some lifetime adversity predicts better outcomes than not only a history of high adversity but also a history of no adversity. This has important implications for understanding resilience, suggesting that adversity can have benefits.When adverse life events occur, people often suffer negative consequences for their mental health and well-being. More adversity has been associated with worse outcomes, implying that the absence of life adversity should be optimal. However, some theory and empirical evidence suggest that the experience of facing difficulties can also promote benefits in the form of greater propensity for resilience when dealing with subsequent stressful situations. I review research that demonstrates U-shaped relationships between lifetime adversity exposure and mental health and well-being, functional impairment and health care utilization in chronic back pain, and responses to experimentally induced pain. Specifically, a history of some lifetime adversity predicts better outcomes than not only a history of high adversity but also a history of no adversity. This has important implications for understanding resilience, suggesting that adversity can have benefits.

The Robust Nature of the Biopsychosocial Model Challenge and Threat: A Reply to Wright and Kirby

This article responds to Wright and Kirbys (this issue) critique of our biopsychosocial (BPS) analysis of challenge and threat motivation. We counter their arguments by reviewing the current state of our theory as well as supporting data, then turn to their specific criticisms. We believe that Wright and Kirby failed to accurately represent the corpus of our work, including both our theoretical model and its supporting data. They critiqued our model from a contextual, rational-economic perspective that ignores the complexity and subjectivity of person-person and person-environmental interactions as well as nonconscious influences. Finally, they provided criticisms regarding possible underspecificity of antecedent components of our model that do not so much indicate theoretical flaws as provide important and interesting questions for future research. We conclude by affirming that our BPS model of challenge and threat is an evolving, generative theory directed toward understanding the complexity of personality and social psychological factors underlying challenge and threat states.

The Nonconscious Influence of Religious Symbols in Motivated Performance Situations

Anthropological, sociological, and psychological theories suggest that religious symbols should influence motivational processes during performance of goal-relevant tasks. In two experiments, positive and negative religious (Christian) symbols were presented outside of participants’ conscious awareness. These symbols influenced cardiovascular responses consistent with challenge and threat states during a subsequent speech task, particularly when the speech topic concerned participants’ mortality, and only for Christian participants; similar images lacking Christian meaning were not influential. Results suggested that these effects were due to the learned meaning of the symbols and point to the importance of religion as a coping resource.

Cardiovascular Correlates of Emotional Expression and Suppression: Do Content and Gender Context Matter?

Three studies examined cardiovascular (CV) responses during emotional expression with empathically responsive strangers. Study 1 demonstrated that self-relevant emotional expression fostered CV reactivity consistent with challenge. Study 2 manipulated content of discussion by assigning participants to 1 of 4 conditions: emotional, nonemotional, emotional suppression, nonemotional suppression. In same-sex dyads. emotional expression elicited CV challenge reactivity whereas emotional suppression evoked CV threat reactivity, both compared with appropriate control groups. In opposite-sex dyads, however, emotional expression engendered CV threat. Because same- and opposite-sex disclosures differed, Study 3 controlled the content of emotional expression while manipulating gender context. Results confirmed findings from the first 2 studies, indicating that both context and content of emotional expression influenced CV effects. Findings are discussed within a theoretical challenge and threat perspective.

An Upside to Adversity? Moderate Cumulative Lifetime Adversity Is Associated With Resilient Responses in the Face of Controlled Stressors

Despite common findings suggesting that lack of negative life events should be optimal, recent work has revealed a curvilinear pattern, such that some cumulative lifetime adversity is instead associated with optimal well-being. This work, however, is limited in that responses to specific stressors as they occurred were not assessed, thereby precluding investigation of resilience. The current research addressed this critical gap by directly testing the relationship between adversity history and resilience to stressors. Specifically, we used a multimethod approach across two studies to assess responses to controlled laboratory stressors (respectively requiring passive endurance and active instrumental performance). Results revealed hypothesized U-shaped relationships: Relative to a history of either no adversity or nonextreme high adversity, a moderate number of adverse life events was associated with less negative responses to pain and more positive psychophysiological responses while taking a test. These results provide novel evidence in support of adversity-derived propensity for resilience that generalizes across stressors.

Cardiovascular measures independently predict performance in a university course

The factors that predict academic performance are of substantial importance yet are not understood fully. This study examined the relationship between cardiovascular markers of challenge/threat motivation and university course performance. Before the first course exam, participants gave speeches on academics-relevant topics while their cardiovascular responses were recorded. Participants who exhibited cardiovascular markers of relative challenge (lower total peripheral resistance and higher cardiac output) while discussing academic interests performed better in the subsequent course than those who exhibited cardiovascular markers of relative threat. This relationship remained significant after controlling for two other important predictors of performance (college entrance exam score and academic self-efficacy). These results have implications for the challenge/threat model and for understanding academic goal pursuit.

Something to gain, something to lose: The cardiovascular consequences of outcome framing

Previous findings support that cardiovascular markers of challenge/threat reflect ones relative balance of resource versus demand evaluations during task performance. We report a novel investigation of the effects of performance outcome framing (potential for gain vs. loss) on these cardiovascular markers. Before completing a test, participants learned they could gain or lose money, or neither, based on performance. Results revealed that during the test, gain and loss framings led to higher heart rate and lower pre-ejection period than no incentive, consistent with greater task engagement; gain framing led to lower total peripheral resistance and higher cardiac output than loss framing, consistent with relative challenge. Implications for challenge/threat and related research and theories are discussed.

Trait Social Anxiety and Physiological Activation: Cardiovascular Threat During Social Interaction

Physiological activation is thought to be a part of the constellation of responses that accompany social anxiety, but evidence regarding the nature of such activation is mixed. In two studies, the relationship between trait social anxiety and responses during social interaction was explored using on-line cardiovascular indexes of threat. Across Studies 1 and 2, women higher in trait social anxiety exhibited cardiovascular responses consistent with greater threat during the social interaction than those lower in social anxiety. Retrospective self-reports (Studies 1 and 2), as well as partner ratings and interaction behavior (Study 2), also revealed consistent differences as a function of trait social anxiety. Study 2 added male participants, among whom a divergence emerged between results for physiological measures and other responses. These findings have implications for understanding physiological as well as psychological processes among people with social anxiety during social interaction.