Although stressors are frequently linked to several negative health outcomes, experiencing stressors may be necessary for enhancing performance. At present, the literature is lacking a unified, comprehensive framework that accounts for both positive and negative outcomes following stressors. Therefore, we introduce the framework of hormesis, which has been applied in biological research for decades. According to hormesis, small-to-medium doses of a stressor can stimulate an organism's response, while large doses cause detrimental effects. In this article, we argue that these dose-response dynamics can be found in various domains of performance psychology (i.e., eustress and distress, psychological momentum, emotions, motivation, confidence, cognitive performance, training, skill acquisition, adversity, and trauma). Furthermore, hormesis also accounts for the inter- and intra-individual variability commonly found in responses to stressors. Finally, from an applied perspective, leveraging hormesis may stimulate new psychological interventions that mimic the well-known effects of (toxic) vaccinations at the level of behavior.
DOCUMENT
The COVID-19 crisis impacts populations globally. This impact seems to differ for groups with low- and high-socioeconomic status (SES). We conducted a qualitative study in the Netherlands using a salutogenic perspective to examine experiences with stressors and coping resources during the pandemic among both SES groups to gain insight on how to promote the health and well-being of these groups. We conducted 10 focus group discussions and 20 interviews to explore the experiences, including resources and stressors, of respondents from low- (N = 37) and high-SES (N = 38) groups (25-55 years, Dutch speaking). We analyzed the findings at individual, community, and national levels. The results show that coping depends on government-imposed measures and the way individuals handle these measures; restriction to the home context with positive and negative consequences for work and leisure; psychological negative consequences and resourcefulness; and social effects related to unity (e.g. social cohesion or support) and division (including polarization). Respondents with lower SES expressed more problems with COVID-19 measures and experienced more social impact in their neighborhood than those with higher SES. Where low-SES groups especially mentioned the effects of staying at home on family life, high-SES groups mentioned effects on work life. At last, psychological consequences seem to differ somewhat across SES groups. Recommendations include consistent government-imposed measures and government communication, support for home schooling children, and strengthening the social fabric of neighborhoods.
MULTIFILE
Background Evidence about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on existing health inequalities is emerging. This study explored differences in mental health, sense of coherence (SOC), sense of community coherence (SOCC), sense of national coherence (SONC), and social support between low and high socioeconomic (SES) groups, and the predictive value of these predictors for mental health. participants and procedure A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey in the Netherlands in October 2021, comprising a total of 91 respondents (n = 41, low SES; n = 50, high SES). results There were no differences in mental health, SOC, SOCC, SONC, and social support between the groups. SOC was a predictor for mental health in both groups and SOCC for the low SES group. conclusions We found that both SOC and SOCC predict mental health during the pandemic. In the article we reflect on possible pathways for strengthening these resources for mental health.
DOCUMENT
