Cited by 532Stress Responses and CortisolAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

Expanding stress theory: prolonged activation and perseverative cognition

Brosschot, Jos F., Pieper, Suzanne, Thayer, Julian F.·2005·Psychoneuroendocrinology

Abstract

Several theories of the stress-disease link have now incorporated prolonged activation. This article argues that these theories still lack an important element, that is, the cognitive nature of the mechanism that causes stress responses to be sustained. The perception of stress and the initial response to it do not automatically lead to prolonged activation. The active cognitive representations of stressors need to be prolonged in order to extend their physiological concomitants. We call this mediating process perseverative cognition, and it is manifested in phenomena such as worry, rumination, and anticipatory stress. We summarize evidence suggesting that these phenomena are indeed associated with physiological activation, including cardiovascular, endocrinological and immunological parameters. This evidence is still far from sufficient, due to the many methodological insufficiencies in the studies involved. Nevertheless, it makes clear that cognitive phenomena characterized by perseverative cognition may be likely candidates to mediate the effects of stress sources on somatic disease. We also argue that there is a dearth of evidence supporting the role of prolonged activation. There are a limited number of studies demonstrating prolonged activity related to stressors and emotional episodes, and their methodologies often do not allow unambiguous conclusions. Even more important, the crucial assumption that prolonged activation actually leads to pathogenic states and disease has received hardly any attention yet and therefore is still largely unsupported. There are only a few studies that showed that anticipatory responses and slow recovery from stress predicted disease states.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.04.008

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brosschot, J. F., Pieper, S., & Thayer, J. F.
Affiliations
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • National Institute on Aging (US)
Corresponding author
Brosschot, Jos F.
Venue
Psychoneuroendocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-11
Volume
30
Issue
10
Pages
1043-1049
ISSN
0306-4530 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2132541524
Cited by
532
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 23
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychoneuroendocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
perseverative cognition, worry, rumination, anticipatory stress, immune activation, stress recovery
MeSH terms
Cognition, Humans, Risk Factors, Stress, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review