Effects of duration and intensity of psychological stressors on mental health outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic psychosocial stress is a major etiological risk factor for major depressive disorder. The main goal of the present study was to investigate the impact of both the intensity (number of daily stressors or severity of chronic stress) and the duration (daily vs chronic) of different stressors on mental health outcomes in healthy adults. One hundred and forty participants were recruited for this study. We measured recent daily stressors, chronic stress level, perceived stress level, and history of childhood maltreatment. Both direct and indirect effects between different stressors and mental health outcomes were analyzed using correlational analysis and structural equation modeling. We found that the duration of stressors was a much stronger predictor of the severity of depression than their intensity, whilst for anxiety both daily and chronic stressors had a stronger impact compared to perceived stress level. Chronic stress level, rather than daily stressors or perceived stress, was the strongest predictor of general distress, depression, and anxiety, whilst both daily and chronic stressors mediated the relationship between childhood maltreatment and mental health outcomes. Our results emphasize the unique role of chronic stress in the development of depression and confirm that the impact of stress on depression is driven by chronic ongoing stress, rather than more recent stressful events or history of childhood maltreatment. These findings suggest that both the duration and intensity of stressors rather than the level of perceived stress alone may have a greater predictive value in determining the effect of stress on anxiety and depression.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".