Biological Psychology - CLPS11083
The Psychology of Mental Health Conversion Course – Biological Psychology
This document contains example essays, lecture notes and reading notes
Exam - Answer 2 essay questions out of a choice of 5 (2 hours)
Topics:
Topic 1 - Biorhythms, Sleep and Health
Topic 2 – Stress and Health
Topic 3 – Sex Hormones, Cognition and Behaviour
Topic 4 – A Biological Basis for Mental Illness
Topic 5 – Drugs, Behaviour and Mental Health
Example Essays:
Essay 1 - Discuss the positive and negative effects of stress
While there is no accepted definition of stress, stress can be broadly defined as a pattern of physiological,
behavioural, emotional and cognitive responses to real or imagined stimuli (which this essay will define as
‘stressors’) that are perceived as preventing a goal or endangering/threatening well-being (Carlson et al,
2000). Although acute stress (lasting for minutes to hours (Dhabhar, 2014) has been shown to have
adaptive qualities and moderate levels of stress may be positive, substantial research exists to demonstrate
the negative impact of long-term, chronic stress (which lasts several hours a day for weeks or more
(Dhabhar & McEwan, 1997), on health outcomes. This essay will explore the direct and indirect negative
effects it can have on individuals’ lives. However, while research has predominantly focused on the negative
impacts of stress, stress can be adaptive and have some positive effects on functioning. Fundamentally,
stress should be recognised as an interaction between the individual and their environment, highlighting
that stress impacts individuals differently, and therefore, research findings should not be generalised.
Positive effects of stress
Selye (1976) describes the dual nature of stress in which short-term stress can produce adaptive changes
such as the mobilisation of energy resources. For example, the fight or flight response coined by Cannon
(1915) refers to the physiological reaction to a real threat or danger intended to promote survival. The
physiological changes due to stress can be seen in two systems: the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal (HPA)
axis and the sympathetic adrenal medullary (SAM) system. Within the APA axis, stressors can stimulate the
release of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) from the anterior pituitary, which triggers the release of
glucocorticoids such as cortisol, which can have several physiological effects such as increasing blood flow
to muscles and promoting the conversion of protein to glucose. Additionally, stressors can activate the SAM
system, increasing the amounts of adrenaline and noradrenaline released from the adrenal medulla, which
also increases blood flow by increasing heart rate and blood pressure, making us mentally and physically
alert. These physiological changes demonstrate the adaptive and protective nature of short-term stress,
helping prepare an organism to deal with challenges (Dhabhar, 2014).
Additionally, evidence suggests that the short-term stress response prepares the immune system for
challenges. For example, a meta-analysis by Segerstrom and Miller (2004) which analysed over 300 studies,
found that acute stress (such as public speaking) led to improvements in immune function. Furthermore,
Dhabhar (2014) found that short-term cytokine-induced inflammatory responses help the body combat
infection, whereas long-term cytokine release is associated with various adverse health consequences.
Furthermore, Rudland et al (2018) highlight that stress research has focused too heavily on distress and
use the concept of eustress or good stress (which means a beneficial or healthy response to a stress,
associated with positive feelings (Selye, 1974)) to describe how stress can be good for learning. For
,Biological Psychology - CLPS11083
example, stress has been found to improve mental function, boost memory, enhance motivation and
resilience and speed up brain processing (Kaiseler et al, 2009; Cahill et al 2003; Hancock, 1989). However,
Nelson and Simmonds (2003) argue the concept of eustress is incomplete and has been insufficiently
explored, in part, due to a lack of criteria in differentiating eustress from other types of stress, which points
to a major challenge in studying stress in that the concept of stress is too broad.
Negative impacts of stress on health (direct)
However, the negative impacts of stress are so pervasive it is clear why research has focused on this. For
example, a Mental Health Foundation (2018) survey of over 4,500 participants, found that 74% of UK
adults have felt so stressed at some point over the last year they felt overwhelmed or unable to cope. This
can have significant adverse effects on health. For example, Segerstrom and Miller (2004) found that
chronic stress, such as caring for an ill relative or experiencing a period of unemployment, adversely
affected the adaptive immune system. Kiecolt-Glaser et al. (1995) found that caregivers who were stressed
due to caring for a relative with Alzheimer's disease took longer to heal their wounds compared to the
control group. Similarly, Khansari et al. (1990) found that people under stress are more likely to suffer from
more frequent illness. Allostatic load has also been used to express the negative impact on the body due to
repeated exposure to stress (McEden, 1998). Early experiences of stress can also have a negative impact on
health, as children subjected to maltreatment and other forms of severe stress display a variety of brain
and endocrine system abnormalities (Klengel & Binder, 2015).
These findings suggest that stress can directly impact a variety of health outcomes. However, given that
these studies are correlational, it is difficult to prove that stress makes you more susceptible to infectious
diseases. This points to the complex nature of the immune system and the challenge of researching stress
through correlational studies. However, the large amount of evidence that exists suggests that chronic
stress can have a significantly negative impact on health.
(Indirect)
Research has shown that stress can indirectly affect health for example, a longitudinal study by Drake et al
(2014) showed that sleep is affected by stress and sleep deprivation is related to poorer immune
functioning (Spiegel et al, 2002). Additionally, health behaviours such as diet can be affected, with evidence
showing that people who are high-stress reactors in terms of cortisol production eat more and may prefer
sweet foods, which may increase the likelihood of developing a metabolic syndrome (e.g. Newman et al.,
2006). However, research by Epel et al (2001) found that while stress did impact eating behaviours there
were individual differences between participants which highlights that findings should not be generalised.
Mental Health effects
Stress can also impact mental health. For example, research suggests that most episodes of major
depression are preceded by stressful life events (Hammen, 2005) and Brown & Harris (1989) found
stressors were 2.5 times more likely in depressed patients compared to controls. Research by Van Praag
(2005) has also shown that depression may cause brain disturbances thought to underlie a certain form of
depression. Additionally, research by Fedoce et al (2018) suggests that oxidative stress, which is defined as
an imbalance between prooxidants and antioxidants, may be a major component of anxiety pathology.
However, it is difficult to determine if the stressor is the cause or consequence of depression or anxiety
from such studies. For example, a study by Phillips et al (2015) found evidence of stress causation for
depression but not anxiety, in contrast they found that individuals with high levels of anxiety were more
likely to generate future stressful life events. Therefore, the indeterminate nature of the timing of chronic
stress and depression makes it difficult to evaluate the causal direction of the relationship (Kessler, 1997).
The importance of Moderators
Despite evidence for both positive and negative effects of stress on health and mental health, Stress should
be seen as a process or interaction between demands and the individual’s ability to deal with them (Sulsky
,Biological Psychology - CLPS11083
& Smith, 2005). Therefore, stress responses are individualistic and complex, and the exact response to
stress depends on the stressor, its timing and duration, the nature of the stressed person and their reaction
(Pinel & Barnes, 2021). Therefore, research findings should not be generalised for example, studies have
shown that women report more stressful life events (Kessler, 1985) and rate their stressful life events as
having a more negative impact than men (Davis, 1999). Furthermore, factors such as the predictability of an
event form a critical determinant of the response (Koolhaas et al., 2011), shown by the fact that
experienced skydivers secrete less cortisol and recover faster than novices (Meyer et al., 2015). Individual
perceptions of stress may also be important, as research by Keller et al. (2012) found that individuals who
perceived that stress affected their health and reported a large amount of stress had an increased risk of
premature death.
However, positive expectations for the future might buffer the impact of stress on depression (Kleiman et
al, 2017). Furthermore, Dalgard et al. (2018) have confirmed the “buffer hypothesis” that social support
protects against the impact of stress, shown by Ren et al (1999) who found that social support reduced the
adverse impact of trauma on physical and mental health in US veterans (Ren et al, 1999). This further
highlights the individuality of stress and points to the need to specify details regarding the individual, their
sex/age/ethnicity, the event, the predictability and controllability and the measures used to detect stress
(Deutsch-Feldman et al 2015). Velez et al. (2017) signal this in their study on minority stress as they
highlight the need to differentiate between different minority groups, which are relatively under-
researched.
Conclusion
This essay has highlighted the extensive research that suggests stress can have a negative impact on a
range of health outcomes through direct effects and indirect effects on health and mental health.
However, these findings should not be generalised as stress impacts individuals differently depending on
factors such as the type of stress, duration, and moderators such as dispositional factors and social
support. Furthermore, more research is needed to understand the impact of stress for diverse groups in
society such as minority ethnic groups. Additionally, the positive psychology movement proposes that
greater research attention should be given towards how stress can positively contribute to health and
wellbeing (Seligman, 2000).
Essay 2 - What are some challenges for researchers in understanding how stress affects health?
Researchers have explored the impact of stress on health, including the direct and indirect negative effects
on health and mental health, as well as the positive and adaptive impact of stress. However, several
challenges exist for researchers exploring the impact of stress on health, which this essay will explore.
Firstly, there exists a debate around the concept of stress, which has been described as too broad and all-
encompassing. Secondly, the impact of stress is highly individualistic as stress is an interaction between the
person and their environment and is impacted by factors such as dispositional moderators, social support
and perceptions of the stressful event, meaning that research findings cannot be generalised. Thirdly, is the
complexity of measuring stress, which affects individuals differently and requires multifaceted research
methods to accurately capture all aspects of the stress response. Due to ethical reasons, significant stress
cannot be induced on patients, requiring researchers to follow less intrusive experimental designs or
correlational research, making it difficult to support causal claims. Additionally, the reliance on self-reports
to measure stress may be less reliable. This essay will explore these points further and point to potential
solutions and considerations for future researchers.
1 – Concept of stress
The first challenge to note regarding stress research is the concept of stress itself. As Weick (1970)
emphasises, ‘ stress research has definitional problems’ as definitions are too expansive and include
stimuli, responses, and mediating processes. Additionally, there exist different types of stress or stressors,
, Biological Psychology - CLPS11083
including personal stress, physical stress and social stress, and different stress responses, including
physiological, behavioural, emotional and cognitive (Carlson et al., 2000). Given the multifaceted nature of
the concept, it is important that researchers avoid addressing stress research as a simple ‘cause and
effective’ model, but instead clearly define and identify multiple stress conditions and multiple measures of
stress effects (Cooper and Marshall, 1978).
Kagan (2016) attributes the broad nature of stress in part to Selye’s (1973) permissive use of the term
stress, which he claimed was a nonspecific response of the body that deviated from its usual state and
could be pleasant or unpleasant. However, using such a broad concept of stress limits its usefulness, and
Kagan (2016) argues the concept of stress should be limited to select events that pose a serious threat to
an organism’s well-being. For example, Kagan (2016) argues that researchers naively use the term stress
when referring to situations such as a rat being exposed to light or an individual’s hand being placed in cold
water and argues these should not be used in the same category as years of poverty, war or torture. This
highlights a need for researchers to specify the type of stress they are investigating and the subsequent
effects of this stress. Given that stress can have a wide range of health complications – from direct adverse
effects on immune function (Segerstrom & Miller, 2004), brain and endocrine system abnormalities (Klengel
& Binder), and mental health such as depression (Brown & Harris, 1989) to indirect adverse effects on sleep
(Drake et al, 2014) and diet (Newman et al, 2006) – understanding if there is a connection between the
type of stressor and stress response will enable clinicians to better help their patients suffering from stress.
2 - Individuality
However, stress is fundamentally an interaction between the person and their environment. This further
complicates research, as factors such as dispositional moderators, social support and perceptions of stress
such as predictability and controllability (which are all different for each individual) will impact the stress
response. Therefore, research findings should not be generalised for example, studies have shown that
women report more stressful life events (Kessler, 1985) and rate their stressful life events as having a more
negative impact than men (Davis, Matthews & Twamley, 1999). Furthermore, factors such as the
predictability of an event form a critical determinant of the response (Koolhaas et al., 2011), shown by the
fact that experienced skydivers secrete less cortisol and recover faster than novices (Meyer et al., 2015).
Individual perceptions of stress may also be important, as research by Keller et al. (2012) found that
individuals who perceived that stress affected their health and reported a large amount of stress had an
increased risk of premature death.
Moreover, positive expectations for the future might buffer the impact of stress on depression (Kleiman et
al, 2017). Furthermore, Dalgard et al. (2018) have confirmed the “buffer hypothesis” that social support
protects against the impact of stress, shown by Ren et al (1999) who found that social support reduced the
adverse impact of trauma on physical and mental health in US veterans (Ren et al, 1999). Therefore, to
reduce the ambiguity of the concept of stress, details regarding the individual, their sex/age/ethnicity, the
event, the predictability and controllability and the measures used to detect stress should all be specified
(Deutsch-Feldman et al 2015).
3 – Measurements
A further challenge of stress research is the reliance on correlational research. Experimental studies have
been highlighted as the gold standards of research (McCall & Green, 2004), however, inducing significant
stress on participants would be unethical and therefore, studies are often correlational in nature.
Therefore, while the vast amount of research on stress demonstrates a strong association between stress
and adverse effects on health, this is difficult to prove as only correlational studies are possible (Pinel and
Barnes, 2021). Furthermore, many of the correlational studies focus on one point in time, which limits the
inferences that can be made regarding causality and, therefore, more longitudinal data within multivariate
designs that consider the risk of intervening variables and the long-term consequences of stress should be
used (Cooper and Marshall, 1978). While some stress studies have manipulated a variable to induce stress,
