Cited by 111Stress Responses and CortisolAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesStudent Stress and Coping

Capitalizing on Appraisal Processes to Improve Affective Responses to Social Stress

Open access
Jamieson, Jeremy P., Hangen, Emily J., Lee, Hae Yeon, Yeager, David S.·2018·Emotion Review

Abstract

Regulating affective responses to acute stress has the potential to improve health, performance, and well-being outcomes. Using the biopsychosocial (BPS) model of challenge and threat as an organizing framework, we review how appraisals inform affective responses and highlight research that demonstrates how appraisals can be used as regulatory tools. Arousal reappraisal, specifically, instructs individuals on the adaptive benefits of stress arousal so that arousal is conceptualized as a coping resource. By reframing the meaning of signs of arousal that accompany stress (e.g., racing heart), it is possible to break the link between stressful situations, and malignant physiological responses and experiences of negative affect. Applications of arousal reappraisal for academic contexts and clinical science, and directions for future research are discussed.

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 · 10.1177/1754073917693085

Cites

67 of 67 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

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Jamieson JP (in press). Challenge and threat appraisals In Elliot A, Dweck C, & Yeager D (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  2. Peters BJ, & Jamieson JP (2016). The consequences of emotion suppression in romantic relationships: A challenge and threat perspective. Emotion, 16, 1050– 1066. 27348498

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jamieson, J. P., Hangen, E. J., Lee, H. Y., & Yeager, D. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Rochester (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Jamieson, Jeremy P.
Venue
Emotion Review
Published
2017-10-20
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
30-39
ISSN
  • 1754-0739 (ISSN-L)
  • 1754-0747
OpenAlex
W2766217894
Cited by
111
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 3
FWCI
5.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Emotion Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DigitalCommons - Fairfield (Fairfield University) (submittedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • Seoul National University Open Repository (Seoul National University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Institute of Education Sciences (R305A150036)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD084772)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
Keywords
appraisal process, acute stress, challenge and threat, biopsychosocial model, negative affect, social stress, academic stress

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