Biocultural Strategies for Measuring Psychosocial Stress Outcomes in Field-based Research

Author:

Brewis Alexandra1ORCID,Piperata Barbara A.2,Dengah H. J. François3,Dressler William W.4,Liebert Melissa A.5,Mattison Siobhán M.6,Negrón Rosalyn7,Nelson Robin1,Oths Kathryn S.4,Snodgrass Jeffrey G.8,Tanner Susan9,Thayer Zaneta10,Wander Katherine11ORCID,Gravlee Clarence C.12

Affiliation:

1. School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

2. Department of Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

3. Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA

4. Department of Anthropology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA

5. Department of Anthropology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA

6. Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, and National Science Foundation, Alexandria, VA, USA

7. Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts, Boston, MA, USA

8. Department of Anthropology and Geography, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

9. Department of Anthropology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

10. Department of Anthropology, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA

11. Department of Anthropology, Binghamton University (SUNY), Binghamton, NY, USA

12. Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

Abstract

The goal of assessing psychosocial stress as a process and outcome in naturalistic (i.e., field) settings is applicable across the social, biological, and health sciences. Meaningful measurement of biology-in-context is, however, far from simple or straightforward. In this brief methods review, we introduce theoretical framings, methodological conventions, and ethical concerns around field-collection of markers of psychosocial stress that have emerged from 50 years of research at the intersection of anthropology and human biology. Highlighting measures of psychosocial stress outcomes most often used in biocultural studies, we identify the circumstances under which varied measures are most appropriately applied and provide examples of the types of cutting-edge research questions these measures can address. We explain that field-based psychosocial stress measures embedded in different body systems are neither equivalent nor interchangeable, but this recognition strengthens the study of stress as always simultaneously cultural and biological, situated in local ecologies, social–political structures, and time.

Funder

National Science Foundation

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anthropology

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3