Reference no: EM133554148

Problem

You will create a plan for dealing with stress, based on evidence-based principles. Create a thread called "[your name]'s Stress Plan." Before you get started, watch this video from "Science Friday."

Question I

Discussion Topic: Start by adding up your own "life stress score" using both the original and the revised weights in Table 1. In one study, scores under 200 were associated with illness only 37% of the time, but scores above 300 were associated with illness 79% of the time (Holmes & Masuda, 1974), so anything under 200 you might consider "low to moderate" and over 300 "high" stress. Do your scores on the original vs. revised scales differ very much?

Question II

Discussion Topic: The article described a new method for creating "weights" for each stressor, different from the method used in the original SRRS. Compare the original SRRS weights to the new ones. As a group, please address each of the following points (although each person in the group does not have to address more than one of them).

Question 1. What are the biggest differences you notice between the original and revised weights in the article?

Question 2. Do you see any general trends in the changes in the rankings of what events are most stressful?

Question 3. Do you find these changes surprising, or do they make sense based on how life has changed from 1967 to 2000?

Question 4. Are there any items whose new weightings seem too high or too low based on your own experiences and intuitions?

Question III

Discussion Topic: Several studies have shown a positive correlation (ranging from about .10 to .30) between SRRS scores and various problems or illnesses. This is actually a pretty weak statistical relationship; knowing someone's SRRS score only lets you predict about 1% to 10% of the variability in who gets sick. (So if you scored over 300, it does not necessarily mean you are more likely to get sick than someone who scored under 200.) Another thing to consider is that most of the research using the SRRS was retrospective, meaning that people who already had an illness or problem were asked about the stressors that preceded it.

As a group, please address each of the following points (although each person in the group does not have to address more than one of them).

Question 1. Why might the retrospective nature of the ratings be a problem?

Question 2. Based on your discussions, and your reading of the article, what would you conclude about the validity and usefulness of the SRRS?

Question 3. Did you find your own SRRS answers and score useful as a guide to measuring your stress? Why or why not?