Abstract:The ability to engage in goal-directed behavior despite exposure to stress is critical to resilience. Questions of how stress can impair or improve behavioral functioning are important in diverse settings, from athletic competitions to academic testing. Previous research suggests that controllability is a key factor in the impact of stress on behavior: learning how to control stressors buffers people from the negative effects of stress on subsequent cognitively demanding tasks. In addition, research suggests that the impact of stress on cognitive functioning depends on an individual's response to stressors: moderate responses to stress can lead to improved performance while extreme (high or low) responses can lead to impaired performance. The present studies tested the hypothesis that (1) learning to behaviorally control stressors leads to improved performance on a test of general executive functioning, the color-word Stroop, and that (2) this improvement emerges specifically for people who report moderate (subjective) responses to stress. Experiment 1: Stroop performance, measured before and after a stress manipulation, was compared across groups of undergraduate participants (n = 109). People who learned to control a noise stressor and received accurate performance feedback demonstrated reduced Stroop interference compared with people exposed to uncontrollable noise stress and feedback indicating an exaggerated rate of failure. In the group who learned behavioral control, those who reported moderate levels of stress showed the greatest reduction in Stroop interference. In contrast, in the group exposed to uncontrollable events, self-reported stress failed to predict performance. Experiment 2: In a second sample (n = 90), we specifically investigated the role of controllability by keeping the rate of failure feedback constant across groups. In the group who learned behavioral control, those who reported moderate levels of stress showed the greatest Stroop improvement. Once again, this pattern was not demonstrated in the group exposed to uncontrollable events. These results suggest that stress controllability and subjective response interact to affect high-level cognitive abilities. Specifically, exposure to moderate, controllable stress benefits performance, but exposure to uncontrollable stress or having a more extreme response to stress tends to harm performance. These findings may provide insights on how to leverage the beneficial effects of stress in a range of settings.

Control over stress, Type A behavior pattern, and response to stress.

Type A behavior, personality hardiness, and cardiovascular responses to stress.

Type A behavior and occupational stress: A cross-cultural study of blue-collar workers.

Expression of interpersonal aggression by angered and nonangered persons with the Type A and Type B behavior patterns.

The Type a Behavior Pattern and Immune Reactivity to Brief Stress: Change of Volume of Secretory Immunoglobulin a in Saliva

The nomological validity of the Type A personality among employed adults.

Relationship of Trait, Type A Behavior, and Physical Fitness Variables to Cardiovascular Reactivity and Coronary Heart Disease Risk Potential

Recent life stress predicts blunted acute stress response and the role of executive control

Sense of control buffers against stress

When Does Stress Help or Harm? The Effects of Stress Controllability and Subjective Stress Response on Stroop Performance

Neuroanatomical Correlates of Perceived Stress Controllability in Adolescents and Emerging Adults

Personality and physiological reactions to acute psychological stress

Examining the relationship between subjective exercise tolerance and psychophysiological reactivity during physical stress

Spouse-pair risk factors and cardiovascular reactivity

Chronic academic stress facilitates response inhibition: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence

ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN DAILY STRESSOR CONTROL AND COGNITIVE FUNCTION

Type A behavior and the thallium stress test

Impatience versus achievement strivings in the Type A pattern: Differential effects on students' health and academic achievement.

Acute Psychological Stress Disrupts Attentional Bias to Threat-Related Stimuli

The effect of autonomous and controlled motivation on self‐control performance and the acute cortisol response

When the mind says one thing, but the HPA axis says another: Lack of coherence between subjective and neuroendocrine stress response trajectories in healthy men