November 2003 Issue

Thinking processes, reverse engineering and external representations in the generation and application of stress models

By Dr. Lorraine Cleeton, St. Bonaventure University, NY

Abstract

 This article traces the progress of students taking a stress management course, in which traditional models of stress were presented and new models developed. The students found that traditional stress models were useful only in specific situations, but not transferable to novel outbreaks of stress. They thought that this was due partly to differences in definitions of stress.  The students found it difficult to devise new stress models. 

 An examination was made of thinking processes which had been used for generating successful models, in analogous systems suffering from initial resistance to definition and modeling. Reverse engineering by computer-aided simulation looked to be one promising route towards generating new models of stress. Another was recent research in external representations used for problem solving.

 It is hoped that this review will encourage the development of transferable models of stress and spin off more precise definition of stressors and strains.

Introduction

Two major difficulties arose in a course on stress management. Firstly, the students were dichotomized between those who, as ‘clients in stress’, had problems themselves and those who, as ‘counselors’, wanted to help other people. Secondly, the solutions to novel problems presented by the ‘clients’ were not always amenable to solutions suggested by the ‘counselors’.  To anticipate this polarization of the students the initial aim of the course had been generalized to ‘Eliminating, minimizing and controlling stress in ourselves and in other people’.  Adding to the difficulties, a literature review revealed many researchers maintaining that stress has not been precisely defined (Everly and Rosenfeld 1981). 

For the second run of the course, an additional aim was added – ‘Gaining skills to transfer to transfer to new and novel outbreaks of stress’. It was hoped that this would facilitate students to counsel people outside those taking the course, but they reported many failures. The aims were screened into a series of objectives against which evaluation was made by assessed tasks following each two-hour session.

 Although stress has not been precisely defined, assumptions have been made about ‘the effects of a feeling of acute or prolonged anxiety’ or ‘lack of resolution of conflict’.  Based on such imprecise definitions, which create more constructs than they eliminate, it was not surprising to find widespread disagreement among the students in acceptance of such concepts as 'stress-related illness'. Students were able to fit appropriate models to the symptoms, but needed tools to develop new models to understand novel stressors. Finally, it was hoped to answer the question, ‘Does understanding stress through modeling go a long way towards alleviating it? ‘

Stress Models

Information overload (‘Tap and Jug’) model

 Many people have visions of stress and visions of what would cure it, for example, 'If I didn't have so much work to do', 'If my students were well behaved' or 'If my boss would leave'.

Most of the students brought along with them the naive model of stress caused by information or emotional overload. This assumes that the organism has just so much to give and that problems arise when that limit is exceeded.  Powell and Enright (1990) called this the 'Tap and Jug' model -

Tap and Jug model

The strength of this model lies in simplicity, but its weakness in the variety of capacities of individuals for overload and the variability of their reactions to stimuli (Eysenck 1989). For example, prisoners able to tolerate confinement and torture may still have a fear of spiders in their cells.  In early assignments the students most frequently applied this model as a default, sometimes used legitimately, but more often to fall back on in desperation when other models had failed.

 Capacity - Demand model

 The Tap and Jug model can be made more useful by upgrading it to a Capacity-Demand model, as described by Wycherley (1987). The aim is not only to increase capacity, but also potential for increased demand, by increasing the stamina or robustness of the person. To increase capacity, optimum challenge should be applied, according to the Yerkes-Dodson (1908) Law -

Yerkes-Dodson Law

 This law states that there is a optimum level of challenge - sufficient to stimulate and maintain interest, but not sufficient to cause undue stress.

Capacity – Demand model

Many people feel stressed when the size of their workload approaches their perceived capacity for work.  Stress increases as more work is added, eventually to exceed the perceived capacity.  Ideally one hopes that the workload will decrease, but sometimes as a result of the stress we are scarred and our capacity is reduced.  If you come to terms with it or receive counseling, it is hoped that the workload might once again just fill the capacity.  A better solution would be to achieve more stamina so that there is increased capacity, i.e. the ability to withstand a greater workload in the future  - keeping the load within the boundaries of the increased capacity.

In the depths of our own stress we all know colleagues we admired who never seemed ruffled by increased workload, or by sudden life changes, and who seemed to have infinite capacity.

Weight-on-a-Spring model

Against the background of imprecise definition of stress, the concepts of 'stressors' and 'strains' were discriminated and offered to the students in a cause-effect model.  A 'stressor' might be work overload, causing the 'strain' of fatigue. This is illustrated by the

Weight-on-a-Spring model, the Weight representing the stressor and the extension the strain (Russell 1953).

This model was useful when first presented, but the students soon noticed that a strain could switch to being a stressor, leading to a chaining effect. For example, the strain of fatigue could become the stressor causing the strain of a weakening family relationship.  A stress counselor should enter the chain by defining the stressor and strain at point of entry. There is cost to a client, and difficulties for a counselor, who fails to find the break-point of entry to a closed loop stressor-strain cycle.

Three-Systems model

The students were given local, national and global suicide and mortality figures, with their relationships to variables such as socioeconomic background and marital status.  This led to listings of stress-related illnesses.  The students showed wide variation in their beliefs about discrimination and generalization of this concept, which was not surprising given the background of an imprecise definition of ‘stress’ itself.  The students understood and accepted the Three-Systems Model of behavioral, emotional and physical interaction as described by Powell and Enright (1990), but they barely mentioned it in discussion, counseling or essays.  Perhaps the students felt the model to be too naïve, obvious or inappropriate, even in conditions where its originators saw its relevance.  Perhaps being a textual model it was easily forgotten.  However when students failed to observe behavioral, emotional and physical changes at an early stage in a counseling situation, there were cumulative difficulties in reducing client anxiety.

Type A and B Personalities model

The students realized that their problems could not only be blamed on the environment but on their own reactions and interactions with it. The Type A and B model of behavior traits (Friedman and Rosenan 1959; Glass 1977; Matthews 1982) was introduced. Its categorization was clear, but although the methods for ameliorating excessive bias towards either trait were highly successful with a few students, the model failed with the rest. A new model was proposed for targeting a desirable but hypothetical middle-road Type ‘C’ behavior and developed by role-play to even more satisfying Types D, E, F - - - and subsequent behaviors, where for example reaction to a novel, unexpected event, shock or emergency situation could be controlled to prevent disablement of thought or action.  Assuming attitudes are difficult to change quickly by conventional methods (except by unfortunate negative shock events), the students found that much practice was needed to reach the ‘higher’ levels of C, D, E - - - behavior, beyond the traditional Types A and B.  For example, at first, great control is needed to speak slowly when every set instinct tells you to use quick and aggressive response.  Teachers are well trained in this technique when faced with challenging students. Ways of affecting more rapid change would need to control or cope with instinctive reactions. Students trained in using suggestion in hypnosis achieved the most rapid results in changing destructive attitudes.

Life-Change Units (LCU’s)

Shock events like bereavement can effect rapid temporary or permanent change.  Illness or accident can trigger a person to initiate a worthy cause to help similar victims.  The students completed the Holmes and Rahe (1967) Life-Change Inventory, but found that their reactions to a life-change event were dependent on their hardiness, mental stamina and parental or vocational training -

Life-Change Model

This model suggests that life changes or job changes cause the stress.  Life changes have been placed in a hierarchy.  At the top of the list is 'death of a spouse'.  'Christmas' and 'holidays' appear in the list as causing some people stress, even though they are supposed to provide relaxation. Each life-change item in the list is allocated a score.  You add your scores and the total indicates your stress level.

Perhaps each profession should develop its own LCU’s. For example, teachers are subject to their own list of internal life changes - sudden changes in collaborative teams, the curriculum or family problems. Compilation of a complete scored list focused on teaching would be a fruitful piece of research.

Test Your Stress Level -

Read through this list of life events and write down the Life Change Units (LCUs) value for each that has occurred in the last 12-18 months.

Total your Life Change Units (LCUs). If your score is 150 LCUs or less, your level of stress based on life changes is low. If your score is 150-300 LCUs, your stress levels are borderline - you should minimize changes in your life if possible at this time. If your score is more than 300 LCUs your stress levels are high. You should minimize other changes in your life if possible and work at instituting some stress intervention techniques.

Stress is the body's non-specific response to any demand placed upon it. It is not caused only by negative or adverse influences. Stress increases the rate of wear and tear the body experiences. Americans spend over nine billion dollars a year to deal with stress.

Ritualistic model

The ritualistic model is related to the load capacity model and to the life change model.  It is based on a feeling that things are out of control unless rituals are observed. Eventually this blocks creativity and innovation. The rituals are not confined to working hours. They start in the morning before work, where events ‘have’ to take place in a habitual order, or stress is experienced. In the stress management course, students were weaned from rituals by setting them a homework assignment to break at first just one ritual. They said it was the most difficult assignment of the course. Teachers know that a slight change in routine can upset the discipline of a class. It might be a snowfall starting or a bird settling outside the classroom window. Perhaps the education system should devote itself in the affective domain to teaching children to react appropriately to novel situations, essential for encouraging creativity.

Moving animal model

A simple ‘moving animal’ model was found to be very effective. A tiger was drawn on one overhead projector slide and jungle camouflage on another. The two slides were placed on top of each other on an overhead projector.  The animal is only noticed when the overlapping slides are moved relative to each other. The analogy in stress management is that many people are happy to preserve the status quo and only experience stress when changes are made in their working life.  This model helped to exercise the ‘detector function’ described later in Kuhn’s model (1974).

Microstressors model

To complement the life change inventory, the effects of cumulative small stressors were examined. Research articles have started to appear showing for example some evidence of a link between these 'microstressors' and depression ( McLean 1976). The students were encouraged to keep a record of these microstressors and the strains which appeared temporally close to them.

Assertiveness-Relaxation model

Many of the students asked to be taught Assertiveness. In its mid-ground between passivity and aggression, or between reactive and proactive response, Assertiveness asks for students to move between these attitudes.  Like switching between Type A and B, it was difficult to break lifelong habitual responses to situations. Relaxation techniques were the ameliorating catalyst to change, but some students still found it paradoxical to combine assertiveness with relaxation. Relaxation was therefore practised both in preparation for being more assertive when rights were infringed and also for defusing the aggression of other people. For most students extensive role-play and feedback from external situations effected the desirable responses.

Learning curves model

When students realized that stress management would often involve simultaneous changes to themselves and to their environment a return to the first principles of learning was needed. They had to learn how to learn new responses to stressors. This was difficult because of their ritualizations. Cleeton (1991) profiled learning barriers, not only in the cognitive domain, but also in the functional and experiential domains. Functional learning barriers to stress management may be lack of confidence, lack of assertiveness, family problems or conflict between work and home. Experiential learning barriers may be lack of experience in dealing with problems normally arising at work or home. The students were shown examples of learning curves -

Curve showing a linear rate of learning

achievement

                                                       steep

                                                      (fast learner)

                                                                 (slow learner)

                                                                                      time                                                                                                                       

Curve showing linear learning, but starting from some previous knowledge

achievement

                      --------Previous knowledge

                                                                                       time

More realistically, the following curve shows how many of us learn. It is called the ‘stepped-change model’. For example, when we learn how to play a musical instrument, we achieve an elementary level quite rapidly, and then seem to ‘stick’ at that level and think we will never rise above it. After a number of steps, we may reach a ‘plateau’ where we either give up the practice and learning, or realize that we have reached the limit of our persistence or

ability -  

Curve showing stepped learning

      achievement

                                                                                                   plateau

                                                 step

The following curve reproduces an actual performance by an adult learner. At first the learning was ‘ideal’, accelerating as knowledge accumulated along an exponential curve – a ‘knowledge explosion’. Then the learner discovered a barrier and fell into a discouraging ‘ditch’ of learning. Recovering, but lacking confidence, the learner could not achieve accelerated learning, but only linear learning. A second fall into a ditch leaves the learner so discouraged that some previous learning could not remembered (a learning ‘block’), but eventually recovery took place to reach a plateau of ability and persistence.

Learning Curve showing actual performance of an adult learner

achievement                                                 

                                                                                      plateau

     &nbs