Concordance in salivary cortisol and subjective anxiety to the trier social stress test in social anxiety disorder.

BACKGROUND: Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is characterised by an excessive fear of negative social evaluation. There is a limited understanding of how individuals with SAD react physiologically and subjectively to social stress. METHOD: The Trier Social Stress Test (TSST), an acute social stress task, was completed by 40 SAD individuals (50% female) and 41 healthy controls (matched on age, sex, and education) to examine salivary cortisol and self-reported stress reactivity. Salivary cortisol concentrations and self-reported affect (anxiety, sadness, tiredness, withdrawal, and happiness) were assessed at baseline and across nine-time points during the TSST. RESULTS: Bayesian salivary cortisol analyses revealed no group differences in salivary cortisol levels at baseline or during the TSST, with results comparative after the removal of 17 cortisol non-responders (21%). Contrastingly, the groups significantly differed on self-reported affect. At baseline, the SAD group (vs. controls) reported heightened negative affect and diminished happiness. In response to the TSST, the SAD group (vs. controls) displayed greater negative affect reactivity and diminished happiness reactivity, and significantly higher rates of change in their anxiety and sadness over time. After accounting for differences in the temporal resolution of self-reported versus cortisol responses, a moderate positive association was found between salivary cortisol and anxiety reactivity to social stress that was comparable between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite elevated subjective anxiety, our findings suggest concordance in psychobiological stress reactivity in SAD and healthy controls. We discuss the possibility of heightened subjective sensitivity to social evaluative stress as a core treatment target for SAD.

An introductory guide to conducting the Trier Social Stress Test.

The Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) is a reliable biopsychological tool to examine the effects of acute stress on psychological and physiological functioning in humans. While the TSST reliably increases hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activation, amongst other biomarkers, through a combination of social evaluative threat and uncontrollability, the original protocol is limited in methodological detail that has impacted its reproducibility. Although many studies include a mock job interview and surprise arithmetic task, there are large variations in the timing of events, the number and method of biological (e.g., cortisol) sampling, the administration of a glucose drink, set-up of equipment and rooms, panel composition, and panel interaction with participants. We provide an overview of the potential impact of methodological variations on the stress (cortisol) response. Importantly, we also provide a step-by-step guide as a laboratory manual on how to conduct the TSST. This introductory guide may be a useful and time-saving resource that may also improve the scientific standard and reliability of the reported psychobiological stress effects in future studies.

The Wisdom to Know the Difference.

The ability to regulate emotions is central to well-being, but healthy emotion regulation may not merely be about using the "right" strategies. According to the strategy-situation-fit hypothesis, emotion-regulation strategies are conducive to well-being only when used in appropriate contexts. This study is the first to test the strategy-situation-fit hypothesis using ecological momentary assessment of cognitive reappraisal-a putatively adaptive strategy. We expected people who used reappraisal more in uncontrollable situations and less in controllable situations to have greater well-being than people with the opposite pattern of reappraisal use. Healthy participants ( n = 74) completed measures of well-being in the lab and used a smartphone app to report their use of reappraisal and perceived controllability of their environment 10 times a day for 1 week. Results supported the strategy-situation-fit hypothesis. Participants with relatively high well-being used reappraisal more in situations they perceived as lower in controllability and less in situations they perceived as higher in controllability. In contrast, we found little evidence for an association between greater well-being and greater mean use of reappraisal across situations.