Cited by 190Student Stress and CopingStress and Burnout ResearchBehavioral Health and Interventions

Optimizing stress: An integrated intervention for regulating stress responses.

Open access
Crum, Alia J., Jamieson, Jeremy P., Akinola, Modupe·2020·Emotion

Abstract

The dominant cultural valuation of stress is that it is "bad for me." This valuation leads to regulatory goals of reducing or avoiding stress. In this article, we propose an alternative approach-stress optimization-which integrates theory and research on stress mindset (e.g., Crum, Salovey, & Achor, 2013) and stress reappraisal (e.g., Jamieson, Mendes, Blackstock, & Schmader, 2010) interventions. We further integrate these theories with the extended process model of emotion regulation (Gross, 2015). In so doing, we explain how altering second-level valuation systems-shifting the valuation of stress from "is bad for me" to "can be good for me"-fundamentally changes the overarching goal of stress regulation from reducing stress to optimizing stress responses to achieve valued goals. With this optimization goal in mind, individuals are invited to flexibly identify, select, and engage in specific regulation tactics (e.g., situation selection, attentional control, cognitive change, and response modulation) in ways that help them achieve valued ends as opposed to merely reducing or avoiding stressful experiences. We discuss definitions and issues related to key terms including stress, stressors, stress responses, and stress regulation and outline a research agenda for testing this new integrated theory as an intervention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/emo0000670

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Crum, A. J., Jamieson, J. P., & Akinola, M.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of Rochester (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Venue
Emotion
Published
2020-02
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
120-125
ISSN
  • 1528-3542 (ISSN-L)
  • 1931-1516
OpenAlex
W3003084472
Cited by
190
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 11
FWCI
33.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Emotion (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Education (R305A150036)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
stress optimization, stress mindset, emotion regulation, stressors, stress response, situation selection, attentional control, cognitive change, response modulation
MeSH terms
Humans, 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