Abstract：Inspired by the concept of stress in physiology, the scientific concept of mental stress has been formulated in the fields of medicine and health sciences, and various explanatory models have been proposed during the evolution of the concept. Previous theoretical understandings of mental stress focused on biological and psychological aspects, ignoring the social origins of stress so that most of mental stress researches were limited in the laboratory and clinical aspects. The authors attempt to review the stress problem emanating from the social system, and put forward a new mental stress theory: the social theory for stress that focuses on the comprehensive understanding of the theory and develops a construct for testing of validation. The construct includes several key elements in mental stress system, social stressor, social stress response, and social management of stress, uncertainty stress, the latter being added based on the characteristics of the current society. The author argues that such a theory and the research enterprise must be based on a fundamental understanding of mental stress. Under this structural framework, the validity of the theory was examined respectively in different aspects using our prior research data.
The results showed as follows: (1) Social stressors significantly contribute to mental stress. We analyzed social stressors and mental stress among urban residents in the period of social transformation. Findings found that social transition stressor significantly contribute to high level stress (Health Risk Stress, HRS)，OR were 1.95 (95% CI: 1.78-2.15). Each type of the social stressor do significantly to HRS，OR was 1.50 (95% CI: 1.38-1.62) for changing and competing，1.50 (95% CI： 1.39-1.62) for unfair competing，and 1.96 (95% CI：1.78-2.16) for uncertainty. (2) Stress perceived from social stressors can be directly regarded as mental stress outcomes. We examined stress perceived from social stressors among urban residents: responses of “no stress”, “low stress”, “medium stress”, “high stress”, “very high stress” being coded as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. The results showed that the average level of stress perceived by the respondents for social transformation was 2.28 (SD: 0.77). They were 2.47 (SD: 0.86), 2.38 (SD: 1.02), and 2.04 (SD: 0.85) in changing and competing, unfair competing, and uncertainty. Their perceived stress for each social transaction reached more than “medium stress”. (3) Mental stress is a function of social systems. We measured individual mental stress using the Chinese Perceived Stress Scale during SARS, then transformed it into a population tension index. Findings showed that High population tension is not conducive to their coping behavior against SARS infection. (4) Uncertain stress has a more negative effect on health than general stress. Our study showed that compared with study stress (OR=1.46, 95% CI: 1.17-1.82) and life stress (OR=1.34, 95% CI: 0.83-2.15), uncertainty stress (OR=2.20, 95% CI: 2.06-3.37) was more closely related to mental disorders among university students. We also examined the changing trends of uncertainty stress, and its impact on disease fear and prevention behaviors during the Chinese COVID-19 pandemic, using a prospective observational study. Results showed that uncertainty stress was positively associated with disease fear (β=0.450 46, SE=0.059 64, p<0.001), and negatively associated with self-efficacy (β=－0.669 8, SE=0.010 35, p<0.001), and prevention behaviors (β=－0.020 29, SE=0.008 76, p=0.021). The above results confirm that the construction that we built is reasonable.
Social theory for stress attempts to understand stress from a sociological perspective, enabling us to have a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of mental stress. In the past, stress theory regarded mental stress as a biological and psychological phenomenon while social stress theory regarded mental stress as a social phenomenon. Social theory for stress emphasizes understanding dealings with mental stress from the social system. This stress system or process, from stressors, and stress responses to stress management, each sector is social. It follows that a key difference between a sociological approach and a biological and psychological approach is whether stress issues are conceptualized as social patterns or independently of what exists within the social system. Social theory for stress underscore that efforts should pay greater attention to use sociological approach to understand and effectively control excessive mental stress. It is worth noting that some previous researches regarded the so called “social stress theory” and “social theory of stress” as sociological theories, but they are only actually studies on social determinants of mental stress. This theory fundamentally breaks through the conventional recognition of mental stress and opens up a new perspective for research and applications. Compared with biological and psychological stress perspectives, the perspective of social theory for stress extends mental stress research from laboratory and clinical aspects to broader and more important aspects of the society, largely expanding its application scope. It not only makes individual level researches more dynamic, but also expands the scope of population researches.
杨廷忠 章伟芳 彭嗣惠. 社会压力理论的构建与验证[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 0, (): 1-.
Yang Tingzhong Zhang Weifang Peng Sihui. Constructing and Testing for Validation of Social Theory for Stress. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 0, (): 1-.
