BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The goal of the present study was to replicate and extend previous research on the relationship between stress generation and two well-documented anxiety related cognitive vulnerabilities, Looming Cognitive Style (LCS) and Anxiety Sensitivity (AS). We first sought to replicate findings that LCS and AS augment each other's stress generation effect. Next, we expanded upon these findings by conducting fine grained analyses not possible in the prior study, by using the third edition of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index (Taylor et al., 2007) and examined the individual facets of AS, which includes: Mental Incapacitation (fear of mental impairment), Physical (fear of catastrophic outcomes such as death), and Social (fear of being noticed for trembling, blushing) facets. METHODS: We followed 99 female undergraduates who were assessed twice over a six-week interval. RESULTS: First, the results replicated a previous study and showed that LCS and AS magnified each other's impact on stress generation. Second, analyses using the individual subscales of AS indicated significant interactions between LCS and the Mental Incapacitation and Physical facets of AS but not the Social facet. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of the present study include reliance on self-report measures and the use of a female only sample. Using such a sample is consistent with previous literature, but limits generalizability to males. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings are consistent with the emerging view that stress generation is an active, transactional process and that anxiety-related cognitive styles (much like depressive styles) contribute to stress generation.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The goal of the present study was to replicate and extend previous research on the relationship between stress generation and two well-documented anxiety related cognitive vulnerabilities, Looming Cognitive Style (LCS) and Anxiety Sensitivity (AS). We first sought to replicate findings that LCS and AS augment each other's stress generation effect. Next, we expanded upon these findings by conducting fine grained analyses not possible in the prior study, by using the third edition of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index (Taylor et al., 2007) and examined the individual facets of AS, which includes: Mental Incapacitation (fear of mental impairment), Physical (fear of catastrophic outcomes such as death), and Social (fear of being noticed for trembling, blushing) facets. METHODS: We followed 99 female undergraduates who were assessed twice over a six-week interval. RESULTS: First, the results replicated a previous study and showed that LCS and AS magnified each other's impact on stress generation. Second, analyses using the individual subscales of AS indicated significant interactions between LCS and the Mental Incapacitation and Physical facets of AS but not the Social facet. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of the present study include reliance on self-report measures and the use of a female only sample. Using such a sample is consistent with previous literature, but limits generalizability to males. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings are consistent with the emerging view that stress generation is an active, transactional process and that anxiety-related cognitive styles (much like depressive styles) contribute to stress generation.