Peggy M. Zoccola

Emotion regulation and cortisol reactivity to a social-evaluative speech task.

BACKGROUND Previous laboratory studies have found a relationship between experimentally manipulated emotion regulation strategies such as suppression and reappraisal and cardiovascular reactivity. However, these studies have not examined trait forms of these strategies and cortisol responses. The aim of the present study is to investigate the relationship between trait suppression, reappraisal, and cortisol reactivity to a social-evaluative speech task. METHODS Participants completed the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire [ERQ; Gross, J.J., John, O.P., 2003. Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 85, 348-362] to assess trait suppression and reappraisal and were asked to complete a speech task in front of an evaluative audience. They provided five saliva samples throughout the duration of the session to assess cortisol response patterns. RESULTS Consistent with hypotheses, trait suppression predicted exaggerated cortisol responses to the speech task, with those scoring higher on suppression exhibiting greater cortisol reactivity. High levels of trait reappraisal also predicted exaggerated cortisol reactivity to the speech task. CONCLUSIONS Findings suggest that certain emotion regulation strategies such as suppression and reappraisal predict heightened cortisol reactivity to an acute stressor. Future studies should examine the psychological mechanisms through which these emotion regulation strategies affect cortisol response patterns.

Rumination and cortisol responses to laboratory stressors.

Objective: For some, a stressor’s psychological and physiological influence ceases on removal; for others, the effects may persist through rumination. These repetitive, intrusive thoughts might prolong physiological stress responses. Previous studies produced mixed results, indicating a need to clarify the relationship between rumination and cortisol responses. The current study investigated whether a laboratory speech task is sufficient to elicit rumination and whether those who ruminated in response to the speech task have elevated cortis of responses. Additionally, whether trait depressive rumination follows a similar pattern was examined. It was hypothesized that those delivering speeches in a social-evaluative context would experience more posttask rumination and that greater posttask rumination would predict elevated cortisol responses. Methods: Eighty-nine participants performed a speech in front of an evaluative panel (SET) or in one of two nonexplicitly evaluative conditions. Participants indicated the frequency of the thoughts they experienced during a 10-minute rest period after the speech as a measure of posttask rumination. Salivary cortisol was collected at five time points throughout the session. Results: The SET condition elicited more posttask rumination than the nonexplicitly evaluative conditions. Posttask rumination was associated with amplified and prolonged elevations in cortisol across all conditions. Trait depressive rumination was associated with blunted cortisol responses in the SET condition. There was no association between trait depressive rumination and cortisol responses in the nonexplicitly evaluative conditions. Conclusion: Results suggest that the nature of the relationship between cortisol activation and rumination may be contingent on how rumination is conceptualized and measured. HPA = hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical; SET = social-evaluative threat; neSET = nonexplicitly evaluative; RSQ-22 = 22-item Rumination Subscale of the Responses Style Questionnaire; TQ = Thoughts Questionnaire; ELISA = enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Rumination predicts longer sleep onset latency after an acute psychosocial stressor.

Objectives: Rumination has been linked to self-reported sleep quality. However, whether rumination is related to an objective sleep parameter has not been tested. This study examined whether rumination predicts sleep onset latency (SOL) on the night after an acute psychosocial stressor. We hypothesized that those who ruminate (assessed with both trait and stressor-specific measures) would have longer SOL (assessed with objective and subjective methods). Methods: Seventy participants delivered a 5-minute speech in front of an evaluative panel during an afternoon laboratory session. Trait rumination was assessed before the stressor. Stressor-specific rumination was captured with the frequency of task-related thoughts participants experienced during a 10-minute rest period after the stressor. Participants wore actigraphs on their wrists on the night after the laboratory session to measure objective sleep onset latency (SOL-O). Subjective sleep onset latency was estimated by participants on the subsequent morning. Results: Consistent with hypotheses, trait and stressor-specific rumination predicted longer SOL-O and subjective sleep onset latency, respectively. In addition, trait and stressor-specific rumination interacted to predict longer SOL-O. SOL-O was longest among those who engaged in more stressor-specific rumination and had greater trait rumination scores. Neither rumination measure was related to sleep duration or wakefulness after sleep onset. Conclusions: The findings from this study are consistent with previous research linking rumination to subjective sleep quality. The results also suggest that post-stressor ruminative thought may predict delayed sleep onset for those with a propensity for rumination. SOL = sleep onset latency; SOL-O = objective sleep onset latency; SOL-S = subjective sleep onset latency; WASO = wakefulness after sleep onset..

Assessing the relationship between rumination and cortisol: A review

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS For individuals who ruminate, or mentally rehearse past stressful events, the physiological effects of a stressor may be longer lasting. This is well-supported within the cardiovascular domain. In the context of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and cortisol, the results are inconsistent. This review summarizes key theoretical and methodological issues that contribute to these mixed findings among the 15 studies to date that have examined the association between rumination and cortisol. RESULTS State measures of rumination were consistently linked to increased cortisol concentrations. Stress-related rumination questionnaires were often positively associated with cortisol, whereas depression-related rumination scales predicted lower cortisol concentrations or were unrelated to cortisol. Rumination manipulations in the laboratory (e.g., ruminative self-focused writing tasks compared to distraction writing tasks) influenced cortisol concentrations, but often did not increase cortisol relative to baseline values. Studies that utilized social-evaluative stressor tasks to examine the relationship between rumination and cortisol levels generally showed that rumination predicted greater cortisol reactivity or delayed recovery. Results from studies examining rumination and basal cortisol or the cortisol awakening response were inconsistent. CONCLUSION The ways in which researchers conceptualize and assess rumination and the associated cortisol response influences the association between rumination and cortisol. Suggestions for future studies in this area of research are provided.

The Perceived Stress Reactivity Scale: Measurement Invariance, Stability, and Validity in Three Countries.

There is accumulating evidence that individual differences in stress reactivity contribute to the risk for stress-related disease. However, the assessment of stress reactivity remains challenging, and there is a relative lack of questionnaires reliably assessing this construct. We here present the Perceived Stress Reactivity Scale (PSRS), a 23-item questionnaire with 5 subscales and 1 overall scale, based on an existing German-language instrument. Perceived stress reactivity and related constructs were assessed in N = 2,040 participants from the United Kingdom, the United States, and Germany. The 5-factor structure of the PSRS was found to be similar in the 3 countries. In the U.S. sample the questionnaire was applied using 2 modes of administration (paper-pencil and computerized), and measures were repeated after 4 weeks. Measurement invariance analyses demonstrated full invariance across mode of administration and partial invariance across gender and countries. Scale scores differed between countries and genders, with women scoring higher on most scales. Overall, reliability analysis suggested good stability of PSRS scores over a 4-week period, and validation analysis showed expected associations with related constructs such as self-efficacy, neuroticism, chronic stress, and perceived stress. Perceived stress reactivity was also associated with depressive symptoms and sleep. These associations were particularly strong when individuals scoring high on perceived stress reactivity were exposed to chronic stress. In sum, our findings suggest that the PSRS is a useful and easy-to-administer instrument to assess perceived stress reactivity.

Salivary cortisol responses to a psychosocial laboratory stressor and later verbal recall of the stressor: The role of trait and state rumination

This study investigated whether trait rumination predicts greater increases in salivary cortisol concentration and delayed recovery in response to a standardized, acute laboratory psychosocial stressor (modified Trier Social Stress Test). It also tested whether trait and state rumination predict reactivation of the cortisol response during later verbal recall of the stressor. Fifty-nine undergraduates (31 females; 28 males) completed the stress protocol and returned 2 weeks later for a surprise interview about the first session, conducted in either a supportive or unsupportive context. Participants completed a measure of trait rumination and reported negative thoughts about the stressor in the 2 weeks between sessions (state rumination). Trait rumination was associated with greater reactivity of salivary cortisol level and delayed recovery from the stressor, F(1,310) = 6.77, p < 0.001. It also predicted greater cortisol reactivity when recalling the stressor, but only for males in the unsupportive interview context, F(2,119) = 7.53, p < 0.001. This effect was heightened for males who also scored high on state rumination, F(2,119) = 7.53, p < 0.001. Rumination was not associated with cortisol responses to the interviews in females. The findings indicate that rumination may play a role in prolonging cortisol stress responses through delayed recovery and reactivation and that rumination disposition and the context of stressor recall are important in understanding the rumination–cortisol response association.

Trait and state perseverative cognition and the cortisol awakening response

Perseverative cognition (i.e., rumination, worry) may amplify or maintain cortisol stress responses. The present study examined the effects of trait and state perseverative cognition (PC) on the cortisol awakening response (CAR). We hypothesized that trait PC and state (prior days) PC would be associated with greater CARs. Undergraduates scoring high (N=77) and low (N=42) on trait PC were included. Participants reported worries about upcoming events and ruminations on past events that occurred throughout the day as a measure of state PC. The next morning, saliva samples were collected 0, 30, 45, and 60min after awakening to assess the CAR. Area under the curve (AUC) and 30-min increase (30-min Inc) were calculated to capture the salivary cortisol total output and increase relative to baseline in the hour after awakening. There was no effect of trait PC on the CAR. In contrast, reports of worrying and/or ruminating the night before predicted greater increases in cortisol concentration and total cortisol output compared to those who neither ruminated nor worried the night before. These effects were not accounted for by depressed mood, anxiety, sleep, or recent stressors. Findings suggest differential effects of trait and state PC on the CAR and highlight the importance of using proximal measures in examining individual differences in the CAR.

Post-stress rumination predicts HPA axis responses to repeated acute stress

Failure of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis to habituate to repeated stress exposure is related with adverse health outcomes, but our knowledge of predictors of non-habituation is limited. Rumination, defined as repetitive and unwanted past-centered negative thinking, is related with exaggerated HPA axis stress responses and poor health outcomes. The aim of this study was to test whether post-stress rumination was related with non-habituation of cortisol to repeated stress exposure. Twenty-seven participants (n=13 females) were exposed to the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) twice on consecutive afternoons. Post-stress rumination was measured after the first TSST, and HPA axis responses were assessed by measuring salivary cortisol 1 min before, and 1, 10, 20, 60, and 120 min after both TSSTs. Stress exposure induced HPA axis activation on both days, and this activation showed habituation indicated by lower responses to the second TSST (F=3.7, p=0.015). Post-stress rumination after the first TSST was associated with greater cortisol reactivity after the initial stress test (r=0.45, p<0.05) and with increased cortisol responses to the second TSST (r=0.51, p<0.01), indicating non-habituation, independently of age, sex, depressive symptoms, perceived life stress, and trait rumination. In summary, results showed that rumination after stress predicted non-habituation of HPA axis responses. This finding implicates rumination as one possible mechanism mediating maladaptive stress response patterns, and it might also offer a pathway through which rumination might lead to negative health outcomes.

Eliciting and maintaining ruminative thought: the role of social-evaluative threat.

This study tested whether a performance stressor characterized by social-evaluative threat (SET) elicits more rumination than a stressor without this explicit evaluative component and whether this difference persists minutes, hours, and days later. The mediating role of shame-related cognition and emotion (SRCE) was also examined. During a laboratory visit, 144 undergraduates (50% female) were randomly assigned to complete a speech stressor in a social-evaluative threat condition (SET; n = 86), in which an audience was present, or a nonexplicit social-evaluative threat condition (ne-SET; n = 58), in which they were alone in a room. Participants completed measures of stressor-related rumination 10 and 40 min posttask, later that night, and upon returning to the laboratory 3-5 days later. SRCE and other emotions experienced during the stressor (fear, anger, and sadness) were assessed immediately posttask. As hypothesized, the SET speech stressor elicited more rumination than the ne-SET speech stressor, and these differences persisted for 3-5 days. SRCE-but not other specific negative emotions or general emotional arousal-mediated the effect of stressor context on rumination. Stressors characterized by SET may be likely candidates for eliciting and maintaining ruminative thought immediately and also days later, potentially by eliciting shame-related emotions and cognitions.

Understanding the utility of emotional approach coping: evidence from a laboratory stressor and daily life

Background: Dispositional emotional approach coping (EAC) marks an adaptive tendency to process and express emotions. EACs association with cognitions, affect, and intra- and interindividual characteristics that may account for its utility was examined in response to an acute stressor and in daily life. Design: This study included a laboratory stress task and ecological momentary assessment. Methods: Healthy undergraduate students (n = 124; mean age: 20; women: 56%) completed a laboratory component (baseline survey, speech stress task, pre- and posttask measures) and five subsequent days of surveys via palm pilot (six surveys/day). Results: Controlling for sex, neuroticism, and social support, greater EAC was associated with more positive cognitive appraisals, personal resources, and positive affect and less-negative affect during the lab stressor, and with more perceived control and positive affect in daily life. Significant EAC × sex interactions were found for poststressor affect: men with high EAC reported more positive affect and women with high EAC reported less negative affect. Conclusions: Findings provide support that EACs utility may be independent of intra- and interindividual characteristics, and that men and women may benefit from EAC in different ways in regards to affect. The proclivity to use EAC may come with a resiliency that protects against stress and promotes general well-being.