Literature DB >> 12788689

The robust nature of the biopsychosocial model challenge and threat: a reply to Wright and Kirby.

Jim Blascovich1, Wendy Berry Mendes, Joe Tomaka, Kristen Salomon, Mark Seery.   

Abstract

This article responds to Wright and Kirby's (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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12788689     DOI: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0703_03

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Rev        ISSN: 1532-7957


  14 in total

1.  Capitalizing on Appraisal Processes to Improve Affective Responses to Social Stress.

Authors:  Jeremy P Jamieson; Emily J Hangen; Hae Yeon Lee; David S Yeager
Journal:  Emot Rev       Date:  2017-10-20

Review 2.  Measuring the impact of programs that challenge the public stigma of mental illness.

Authors:  Patrick W Corrigan; Jenessa R Shapiro
Journal:  Clin Psychol Rev       Date:  2010-06-30

3.  The impact of mineralocorticoid receptor ISO/VAL genotype (rs5522) and stress on reward learning.

Authors:  R Bogdan; R H Perlis; J Fagerness; D A Pizzagalli
Journal:  Genes Brain Behav       Date:  2010-06-07       Impact factor: 3.449

Review 4.  The Effects of Coping Interventions on Ability to Perform Under Pressure.

Authors:  Sofie Kent; Tracey J Devonport; Andrew M Lane; Wendy Nicholls; Andrew P Friesen
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

5.  Older adults' hemodynamic responses to an acute emotional stressor: short report.

Authors:  Kathi L Heffner; Paul G Devereux; H Mei Ng; Amy R Borchardt; Karen S Quigley
Journal:  Exp Aging Res       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.645

6.  Emotion: The Self-regulatory Sense.

Authors:  Katherine T Peil
Journal:  Glob Adv Health Med       Date:  2014-03

7.  Stressing the person: legal and everyday person attributions under stress.

Authors:  Jennifer T Kubota; Rachel Mojdehbakhsh; Candace Raio; Tobias Brosch; James S Uleman; Elizabeth A Phelps
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 3.251

Review 8.  Can meditation slow rate of cellular aging? Cognitive stress, mindfulness, and telomeres.

Authors:  Elissa Epel; Jennifer Daubenmier; Judith Tedlie Moskowitz; Susan Folkman; Elizabeth Blackburn
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 5.691

9.  Brain mediators of cardiovascular responses to social threat, part II: Prefrontal-subcortical pathways and relationship with anxiety.

Authors:  Tor D Wager; Vanessa A van Ast; Brent L Hughes; Matthew L Davidson; Martin A Lindquist; Kevin N Ochsner
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-05-22       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Development of a Self Report Stress Scale Using Item Response Theory-I: Item Selection, Formation of Factor Structure and Examination of Its Psychometric Properties.

Authors:  Arkun Tatar; Gaye Saltukoğlu; Ercan Özmen
Journal:  Noro Psikiyatr Ars       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 1.339

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.