Development and Validation of a Short Measure of Emotional, Physical, and Behavioral Markers of Eustress and Distress (MEDS).

Helen Pluut,Petru L Curșeu,Oana C Fodor

doi:10.3390/healthcare10020339

Helen Pluut, Petru L Curșeu + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10020339

Copy DOI

Abstract

We report the results of three validation studies for a short measure of emotional, physical, and behavioral markers of eustress and distress as they occur when individuals encounter stressful events in academic and organizational settings. Given the importance of the distinction between “positive” and “negative” stress as well as the recent resurgence of research exploring the differences between challenge and hindrance stress and between eustress and distress, it is important to put forward a short, validated scale that evaluates these constructs. Our short measure—the MEDS—therefore has important theoretical as well as practical implications. By showing that the eustress and distress subscales have adequate internal consistency and good construct and criterion validity, we open new avenues for research that extends our knowledge and understanding of the antecedents and consequences of eustress and distress. We also discuss appropriate uses of the scale in educational and organizational settings.

Highlights

Occupational stress among employees and academic stress among students have been of increasing concern in today’s society due to their deleterious effects on well-being and performance [1,2,3,4,5]
We have distinguished between eustress and distress as different ways people can react to a particular stressor, and we have developed the markers of eustress and distress to capture the emotional, physical, and behavioral markers of eustress and distress
We have presented three validation studies for the MEDS, which consists of 18 items that capture emotional, physical, and behavioral markers of eustress and distress

Summary

Introduction

Occupational stress among employees and academic stress among students have been of increasing concern in today’s society due to their deleterious effects on well-being and performance [1,2,3,4,5]. Researchers have focused extensively on psychological stress, and there is considerable consensus among scholars that stress should be understood in a context, that is, as a relationship between a person and the environment. The person evaluates to what extent the environmental demands (i.e., stressors) pose harm, threats, or challenges [7]. While threat involves an anticipation of harm or losses, challenge appraisals result from feeling positive about a demanding encounter because it has potential for gain and growth. Stress is an individual outcome generated at the interface between individual and situational factors, which is reflected through the person’s appraisal of the environmental demands. Because a stressful encounter can be appraised as either threatening (negative) or challenging (positive) and because “stress is a post-appraisal state” [8] p. Because a stressful encounter can be appraised as either threatening (negative) or challenging (positive) and because “stress is a post-appraisal state” [8] p. 4, it follows that two different types of stress can be distinguished: distress (dysfunctional or “bad stress”) and eustress (functional or “good stress”)

Objectives

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion