Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse




Journal Article

Intra-individual psychological and physiological responses to acute Iabaratory stressors of different intensity


Schlotz,  Wolff
Scientific Services, Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available

Skoluda, N., Strahler, J., Schlotz, W., Niederberger, L., Marques, S., Fischer, S., et al. (2015). Intra-individual psychological and physiological responses to acute Iabaratory stressors of different intensity. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 51, 227-236. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2014.10.002.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0024-46BD-F
Objectives The phenomenon of stress is understood as a multidimensional concept which can be captured by psychological and physiological measures. There are various laboratory stress protocols which enable stress to be investigated under controlled conditions. However, little is known about whether these protocols differ with regard to the induced psycho-physiological stress response pattern. Methods In a within-subjects design, 20 healthy young men underwent four of the most common stress protocols (Stroop test [Stroop], cold pressor test [CPT], Trier Social Stress Test [TSST], and bicycle ergometer test [Ergometer]) and a no-stress control condition (rest) in a randomized order. For the multidimensional assessment of the stress response, perceived stress, endocrine and autonomic biomarkers (salivary cortisol, salivary alpha-amylase, and heart rate) were obtained during the experiments. Results All stress protocols evoked increases in perceived stress levels, with the highest levels in the TSST, followed by Ergometer, Stroop, and CPT. The highest HPA axis response was found in the TSST, followed by Ergometer, CPT, and Stroop, whilst the highest autonomic response was found in the Ergometer, followed by TSST, Stroop, and CPT. Conclusions These findings suggest that different stress protocols differentially stimulate various aspects of the stress response. Physically demanding stress protocols such as the Ergometer test appear to be particularly suitable for evoking autonomic stress responses, whereas uncontrollable and social-evaluative threatening stressors (such as the TSST) are most likely to elicit HPA axis stress responses. The results of this study may help researchers in deciding which stress protocol to use, depending on the individual research question.