Testing the neurocognitive framework for regulation expectation: The relationship between actual/ideal self-esteem and proactive/reactive autonomic stress regulation

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2020.101598Get rights and content

Highlights

  • There was a moderated mediation between self-esteem and stress regulation.

  • There was no effect when ideal self-esteem was high.

  • For low ideal self-esteem, high actual self-esteem led to high proactive regulation.

  • High proactive regulation led to high reactive regulation.

  • Only low ideal and high actual self-esteem predicted increased reactive regulation.

Abstract

Background and objectives

According to the Neurocognitive Framework for Regulation Expectation (NFRE), actual and ideal self-esteem are related to how individuals anticipate and respond to a stressful event. Based on this framework, we investigated whether in individuals with low ideal self-esteem (moderator), a positive relationship between actual self-esteem and reactive autonomic regulation would be mediated by the amount of anticipatory autonomic regulation.

Methods

Forty-five healthy females prepared a speech (i.e., anticipation) and performed it in front of a camera (i.e., stressor). Actual and ideal self-esteem were measured with the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure. Anticipatory and reactive autonomic stress regulation were indexed by heart rate variability, and affective responses were assessed via self-report.

Results

Results were in line with predictions based on the NFRE: when ideal self-esteem was low, higher actual self-esteem was associated with higher reactive autonomic regulation, and this association was mediated by higher anticipatory autonomic regulation.

Limitations

Because only female undergraduates were recruited, replication within a more heterogeneous sample is necessary to further generalize these findings.

Conclusions

These results support the hypothesis, based on the NFRE, that actual and ideal self-esteem interact in predicting the relationship between anticipatory and reactive stress regulation, and are a step forward in the understanding of the mechanisms underlying successful stress regulation.

Introduction

Stress is an uncomfortable "emotional experience accompanied by predictable biochemical, physiological and behavioral changes" during challenging situations (Baum, 1990). Chronic stress can negatively impact health behaviors and physical health (for a review, see Gomez-Bernal et al., 2019) and contribute to the onset of mental disorders such as depression, anxiety, or substance abuse (e.g., Chaby, Cavigelli, Hirrlinger, Caruso, & Braithwaite, 2015; Kendler, Thornton, & Gardner, 2000; Sinha, 2008). However, although stress is part of daily life, not everyone who faces even extremely stressful circumstances develops psychopathology.

De Raedt and Hooley (2016) proposed the Neurocognitive Framework for Regulation Expectation (NFRE), integrating psychological and neurobiological processes, to further our understanding of the mechanisms underlying successful and unsuccessful stress regulation. A central idea is that anticipatory stress regulation (via proactive up- or downregulation of prefrontal-subcortical circuits) facilitates reactive stress regulation (when actually confronted with the stressful event). Another core factor to cope with stressful events is self-esteem (Juth, Smyth, & Santuzzi, 2008; Taylor et al., 2008; Kogler et al., 2017. According to the NFRE, anticipatory stress regulation is influenced by the individual's actual and ideal self-esteem. Whereas actual self-esteem is defined as an individual's evaluation of the current self, ideal self-esteem can be defined as the representation of the attributes that one would like to possess (Remue, Hughes, De Houwer, & De Raedt, 2014). Within the context of stress regulation, actual self-esteem is considered to be the result of past coping experiences and is related to one's expectation to be (un)able to deal with an upcoming stressful event. Instead, ideal self-esteem is related to one's standards and therefore to one's (in)ability to accept (the possibility of) failure.

De Raedt and Hooley (2016) propose that a combination of high actual and low ideal self-esteem should predict successful stress regulation. Indeed, high actual self-esteem fuels the expectation that one will be able to deal with a challenging situation, stimulating the individual to engage in proactive stress regulation, whereas low ideal self-esteem makes it easier to accept failure in circumstances where it is not possible to deal with the stressor as expected. In other words, when faced with an upcoming stressful event, an individual characterized by high actual self-esteem is able to engage active anticipation of the event without experiencing excessive pressure when ideal self-esteem is low (no high personal standards). These individuals have a positive expectancy regarding their ability to deal with the stressor, but they can also accept when this would not be possible. They engage in active anticipation and increased proactive control, by which we refer to the exertion of cognitive effort in preparation for an upcoming stressful event, by sustained anticipatory activity of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC; Braver, 2012; Herwig et al., 2007). Previous findings have shown that, when individuals actively reduce their experience of negative emotions, increased prefrontal control decreases amygdala activation through the cortical-subcortical pathway (e.g. Wager, Davidson, Hughes, Lindquist, & Ochsner, 2008; for an overview, see; De Raedt, Vanderhasselt, & Baeken, 2015). As a result, proactive anticipation (i.e., adaptive coping with a stressor when anticipating it) should facilitate one's reactive stress regulation (i.e., when confronted to the stressor).

In contrast, all other combinations of actual and ideal self-esteem (i.e., high actual and high ideal self-esteem, low actual and low ideal self-esteem, low actual and high ideal self-esteem) should lead to unsuccessful stress regulation. These individuals experience either too much (i.e., high ideal self-esteem) or too little (i.e. low actual combined with low ideal self-esteem) pressure and therefore either engage in stressful anticipation (which depletes their cognitive resources or increases rumination) or do not engage in active anticipation at all. These latter individuals are characterized by a passive style with no engagement in proactive control, as well as a failure to activate specific neurocircuits responsible for stress regulation. Hence, at the neural level, when prefrontal control is not exerted during the anticipation, amygdala activity is not decreased in the face of stress, leading to a more effortful and less successful reactive stress regulation (De Raedt & Hooley, 2016). To summarize, according to the NFRE, only the combination of high actual and low ideal self-esteem is associated with effective proactive stress regulation, which - in turn - facilitates successful reactive stress regulation (and successful stress regulation would in turn influence self-esteem patterns).

Findings within our lab support the importance of considering self-esteem (measured with the same paradigm as in the current experiment) within the context of stress regulation. We observed that the effect of a stressor (i.e., critique) on actual self-esteem was decreased using neurostimulation of the DLPFC (De Raedt, Remue, Loeys, Hooley & Baeken, 2017). In addition, we observed that autonomic regulation processes occurring during the anticipation phase influence reactive stress regulation and recovery (Nasso, Vanderhasselt, Demeyer, & De Raedt, 2018). Yet, it remains to be tested whether actual and ideal self-esteem interact in predicting anticipatory and subsequent reactive stress regulation abilities.

To this aim, we induced stress by telling participants that they would have to prepare (anticipation) and give (reactive regulation) a speech and that their performance would be evaluated. As in prior research, actual and ideal self-esteem were measured via the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP; Remue, De Houwer, Barnes-Holmes, Vanderhasselt, & De Raedt, 2013; 2014), whereas heart rate variability was recorded as an index of autonomic regulation during the anticipation and reactive phase.

In the IRAP, based on the principles of the Relational Frame Theory (Barnes-Holmes, Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2002), individuals will relate two concepts more easily if these concepts are connected as propositional knowledge in memory. The IRAP allows us to distinguish between actual and ideal self-esteem (cfr. Methods and supplements for more information). In addition, by indexing the strength of the relationship though reaction times, it provides an implicit measure of actual and ideal self-esteem.

When individuals are faced with stressful events, a series of autonomic reactions take place. High Heart rate variability (HRV) is an index of flexibility and adaptability in response to stress, and is associated with successful regulation of the emotional response and with long-term well-being (e.g., Butler, Wilhelm, & Gross, 2006; Kemp et al., 2010; Thayer, Åhs, Fredrikson, Sollers, & Wager, 2012). In contrast, low HRV indexes rigidity and inability to adapt, and is therefore linked to stress, disease, and an increased mortality risk (Thayer et al., 2012, Thayer et al., 2012; Taylor et al., 2008). The mechanisms underlying this self-regulation are explained in detail by Thayer and Lane in their model of Neurovisceral Integration (Lane et al., 2009; Thayer & Lane, 2000). In short, based on top–down appraisals of a situation, prefrontal activity influences, through cortical-subcortical pathways, activity of the brainstem and the autonomic nervous system (ANS). The sympathetic and parasympathetic branches of the ANS have concerted but opposite effects on the sinoatrial node of the heart, therefore affecting the variability of the timing of the heart beats. To conclude, HRV is considered a cardiovascular index of cortico-subcortical neural activity that guide flexible behaviour in the face of stress (Thayer, Åhs, Fredrikson, Sollers, & Wager, 2012), for which higher HRV is an index of adaptive self regulation in the face and when confronted with a stressful situation.

Based on these premises, we hypothesized that in individuals with low ideal self-esteem, a positive relationship between actual self-esteem and reactive autonomic regulation (measured by HRV) would be mediated by the amount of anticipatory autonomic regulation (measured by HRV). Instead, when ideal self-esteem is high, we predicted no mediation effect, as in this case HRV should be low during both the anticipatory and reactive phases independently of actual self-esteem levels. We tested this hypothesis with a moderated mediation model (see Fig. 1). Actual self-esteem was the predictor, anticipatory autonomic regulation (as measured by HRV) the mediator and reactive autonomic regulation (as measured by HRV) the dependent variable. Finally, ideal self-esteem was the moderator between the predictor and the mediator, in order to investigate the interaction between actual and ideal self-esteem on proactive and in turn reactive stress regulation.

Section snippets

Participants

We recruited 59 healthy female undergraduates via Experimetrix Momentum™ and the Sona experiment scheduling system of Ghent University. The decision to restrict participation to female participants is based on consistent findings from previous research showing that emotional processing is subject to gender differences (Montagne, Kessels, Frigerio, de Haan, & Perrett, 2005; Stroud, Salovey, & Epel, 2002). We selected native Dutch speakers with no self-reported current (or history of)

Main effect of time on self-reported stress and HRV

We observed a main effect of time on self-reported stress, F(4, 176) = 38.19, p < . 001, ηp2 = 0.47. Specifically, participants’ stress increased from right after baseline to after IRAP, t(44) = −3.26, p = .014, d = −0.49, and from after IRAP to immediately after speech preparation (and thus immediately before giving the speech), t(44) = −8.07, p < .001, d = −1.11; but decreased from after speech preparation to after speech, t(44) = 4.63, p < .001, d = 0.52, and from after speech to after

Discussion

In this study, we explored the hypothesis, based on the Neurocognitive Framework for Regulation Expectation (NFRE) (De Raedt & Hooley, 2016), stating that actual and ideal self-esteem would interact in predicting the relationship between anticipatory and reactive stress regulation.

First, a main effect of time on both self-reported stress and HRV confirmed that the speech task succeeded in inducing stress. Indeed, participants reported increased stress levels after speech preparation and thus

Compliance with ethical standards

Authors declare no conflict of interest. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

This work was supported by the Research Foundation Flanders (G015614N, awarded to RDR and MAV), a grant from

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Selene Nasso: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing - original draft. Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt: Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing - review & editing. Rudi De Raedt: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision,

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Research Foundation Flanders (G015614N, awarded to RDR and MAV), a grant from the Special Research Fund of Ghent University (BOFSTA2017002501, awarded to MAV), and a grant for a Concerted Research Action of Ghent University (BOF16/GOA/017, awarded to RDR).

References (36)

  • J.F. Thayer et al.

    A model of neurovisceral integration in emotion regulation and dysregulation

    Journal of Affective Disorders

    (2000)
  • T.D. Wager et al.

    Prefrontal-subcortical pathways mediating successful emotion regulation

    Neuron

    (2008)
  • C.E. Waugh et al.

    Cardiovascular and affective recovery from anticipatory threat

    Biological Psychology

    (2010)
  • D. Barnes-Holmes et al.

    A sketch of the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and the relational elaboration and coherence (REC) model

    Psychological Record

    (2010)
  • Y. Barnes-Holmes et al.

    Relational frame theory: A post-skinnerian account of human language and cognition

    Advances in Child Development and Behavior

    (2002)
  • A. Baum

    Stress, intrusive imagery, and chronic distress

    Health Psychology

    (1990)
  • R.L. Burr

    Interpretation of normalized spectral heart rate variability indices in sleep research: A critical review

    Sleep

    (2007)
  • E.A. Butler et al.

    Respiratory sinus arrhythmia, emotion, and emotion regulation during social interaction

    Psychophysiology

    (2006)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text