Work can often cause much stress within people. The study by Johansson looks at work and the types of causing stress.
Aim; measure the psychological and physiological stress response in X2 categories of employees.
Method; Quasi exp. (high risk stress - production line / low risk stress - cleaners). Independent measures design.(participants were sawmill workers from Sweden)
Procedure; stress was measured periodically throughout the day using urine samples to detect the adrenaline. Self-report was used to report mood/alertness/caffeine/nicotine consumption.
Results; HSR increased stress levels throughout the day. LSR had decreased stress.
Conclusions; Repetitive, machine paced, high demanding work contributes to higher stress levels.
EVALUATION; Ethical issues need to be considered. Having to take part in the study may cause more stress for the workers as they are having to remember to do the psychological and physiological tests throughout the day. This could be linked to the validity of the study meaning it is therefore lowered by this factor. Are you really measuring their work stress levels? OR are there other factors which may be causing the stress; such as life outside of the work place.
Ecological validity is high as it is a quasi experiment; meaning the overall validity will increase due to this factor.
Daily hassles can cause stress. Stress will depend on the extent of the uplifts and the hassles. They can be outweighed or counterbalanced. (Hassles and uplifts can be linked to barriers and benefits).
Aim; compare hassles and uplifts scale and Berkman life events scale as predictors of psychological symptoms of stress.
Method; Repeated measures design. p's completed scales and assessed psychological symptoms sing hopkins symptom checklist/bradburn morale scale. (p's - 100, california).
Procedure; Tests sent out month before study started. asked to complete hassles every month for 9 months, life events after 10 months, and HSCH/bradburn every month for 9 months.
Results; the more hassles that were reported the more negative symptoms of stress were reported. hassles correlated positively with stress whereas life events did not.
Conclusion; Hassles are powerful predictor of psychological symptoms of stress no matter what life events may have occurred.
Evaluation; Ecological Validity is high. This is because the events and hassles that will be recorded will be true to life as they have actually happened, therefore this will increase the overall validity as what you think is being measured is being measured.
There may be a problem with some ethical issues as through having to fill this in may cause more stress to the participants as they are having to remember to fill in the scales etc.
Lack of Control; Geer & Maisel.
Lacking control in a situation can often cause stress within people. The study by Geer & Maisel looks at perceived/actual control and seeing whether is can reduce stress.
Aim; To see if perceived control or actual control can reduce stress reactions to averse stimuli.
Method; Lab experiement. Shown pictures of dead car crash victims. measured stress through GSR (Galvanic Skin Response) and heart rate. (p's - 60 undergraduate from NYC uni.). Independent measures design. X3 groups.
Procedure; Group 1 - given control. pressed a button for image to disappear. Group 2 - told about a photo and a warning tone that would sound before the photo came. could not turn it off. Group 3 - no control but werent told much about what was going on.
Results; Group 1/3 - Least stress. Group 2 - most stress.
Conclusion; Showed less GSR when they had control over the situation. Showed more GSR when had no control.
Lack of Control; Geer & Maisel.
Evaluation; Ecological validity is low. It is not a natural thing to view photos of dead car crash victims. Therefore it would cause more stress and dis-stress so you may not be measuring what you think; meaning the overall validity would be reduced further.
Ethics are also an issue as you could cause psychological harm to the participants in a situation such as this. They would have to be de-briefed in full and given explanations as to what had been going on in the experiment. (those who were affected could be offered therapy if needed?).