Human Health Psychology
INSTRUCTIONS
Title Page
Overview
1. Statement of the hypothesis investigated or purpose of the article.
2. Brief review of relevant past research, assumptions, or theory.
Content
1. List the key ideas presented in the article.
2. Briefly describe the research methodology used (if appropriate)
3. Findings and interpretations.
Conclusions
1. Integration with textbook content
2. Brief statement of what you have learned from the article
Reference Page – Do NOT use ANY nonprofessional journal references in your Human Health Psychology paper.
-Be scientific. Model your writing on the writing on the writing style of the journal article you are reviewing. Every sentence should be either clearly your opinion, obviously common sense, or cited in the text.
-Integrate and synthesize what you are reading. Reserve your opinions for the final section.
-Avoid quoting. Quotes should very rarely ever be necessary. It\’s your job to integrate and synthesize what you have read.
-Avoid gross general grammatical errors (examples: apostrophe where inappropriate, sentence fragment, flawed sentence structure invalidating the meaning of a sentence).
-Avoid misspelled words (this would not include words with multiple acceptable spelling such as counsel(l)ing, this would include misspellings such as too when two was intended).
-Avoid incontrovertible stylistic APA errors (examples: failing to italicize the volume of a journal in a reference, use of a clear anthropomorphism such as “the purpose of the article is,” this does not include stylistic issues where multiple solutions are possible or where the APA style guide is unclear) Human Health Psychology.
-Avoid editing errors (examples: repeating words, failing to indent a paragraph, failing to capitalize the first word of a sentence).
-Avoid unsupported or misattributed statements in paragraphs prior to the final paragraph (examples: stating that group A engages in a particular behavior without crediting a supporting source, stating that group A engages in a particular behavior when the content of the reviewed article contradicts such a statement, stating that group A engages in a particular behavior and citing the wrong source as support)
-Avoid overstated generalizations prior to final paragraph (unsupported means you have no data or reference to support your generalization, example: all dogs love to play fetch, or all cats like to be scratched behind their ears). Human Health Psychology.
Social Control Factors
Overview
The purpose of this article is to bring to light the relationship between health and the social control factors like social status, social support, and stress. Social support and social status may affect health both positively and negatively; however, pressure has only the negative implications, and hence we should try to avoid it at all costs. We also realize that some of these social control factors are related, for example, depending on the social status of someone, his/her level of stress may either reduce or rise tremendously. In most cases, social support serves to control the level of stress of a person by lowering it. Social relations are necessary for an individual’s relationships and it is not part of luxuries. Critical social determinants of health are social status and social support whereby social status works vertically in that they determine how an individual will respond to stress Human Health Psychology. Social status is a vertical aspect of determinants of health and people only interact with those of their standards: low social status may expose one to more stress (Beck 2007).
According to Beck (2007), social support can be divided into about four elements, which are more meaningful, and hence it is not a monolithic construct. Informational support is the advice given to a person or guidance that is majorly knowledge based and that would help someone solve a problem. Instrumental support is the help given to someone regarding material things and may include providing a means of transport to a health center; another example is providing monetary assistance to someone to solve his/her problems and hence getting rid of the stress that could otherwise cause him/her more questions. Social companionship, on the other hand, leaves someone feeling that you share their issues and that you are in solidarity with them and hence distracting them from their stresses, develops an optimistic mood and thus getting rid of the problem. Emotional support gives a sense of self-worth to the person no matter his/her failures; here it is mainly encouraging someone so that they do not feel useless and as a result elevating their moods and getting rid of stress. Human Health Psychology.
Contributions of different types of social support on health
All types of human interactions can be placed into two categories, that is, status and solidarity. In situation the principal members of a group exercise some privileges over those down the hierarchy; for example, the dominant ones are greater in some skills and therefore are senior, and as a result take control of almost all the resources, which may lead to the latter being deprived of essential elements. For example in a family where there is a sole bread winner, the other members of the family have no say in what the meal is going to be, in some cases the meal may not be balanced and hence imposing nutritional dangers to the juniors, standing a risk of infection to diseases like Tay sach’s disease, Wilson’s disease, and jaundice. Young children may suffer from malnutrition. Solidarity is where individuals relate laterally, and the most important aspect here is a similarity. For people of similar social back, grounds give companion to each other creating a sense of belonging. People sharing a common origin would make each different feel that someone is sharing in their problems and that encourages them to keep off stress Human Health Psychology.
Self-esteem and affiliation may be controlled by the environment. Beck (2007) states that a research conducted by asking women of two groups question related to situations that provoked their anger found that about half of the first team talked about esteem issues, while nearly half of the second teamwere angered with affiliation issues. Issues related to frustrations were affecting approximately 30% of all the women. Socially, these factors affect the female gender more compared to their male opponents. Low self-esteem may result into stress that would be as serious as to lead to depression; however, if an individual is given appropriate emotional support, the problem might be solved, as this will elevate it to a higher level.
Social interactions may influence immune response of both man and animals. These interactions include social hierarchies and social support. According to Beck (2007), research has shown that following a defeat, lower animals like the fish would exhibit an inhibited immune response for about days to weeks and higher animals, on the other hand, will show little or no immune suppression. Social support will affect individuals in the same way. People with social support are usually healthier and have a stronger immune response in contrast to their cohorts who live an isolated lifestyle. This works mainly by buffering the stressors, which may otherwise lead to hypertension, gastric ulcers, muscle weakness, and exposure to some physical ailments.
The effects of the social status on the response to stress were determined by studies carried out on both animals and humans. The primary animal use was the wild baboons where a young male baboon who has reached sexual maturity leaves his troop of origin where security is guaranteed and joins a foreign troop. This transition becomes painful most especially because he may fail to fit into his force of choice and hence rejected by the others. The baboon in his desperations may be accepted by the low members of the army of interest, but even at that he is kept at the periphery and deprived of everything that is his including food. The baboon’s health may stand out, and if so then he may challenge the dominant members of the troop where people enjoy food of their choice and improved mating partners and hence show good health traits while those lower in the hierarchy show signs of chronic stress (Beck, 2007) Human Health Psychology.
The social structures of humans in contrast to animals is much more complicated. Poverty is a risk factor for the health of people as it may lead to reducedb nutrition, inadequate housing as some people may be forced to live in the slums where there are poor drainage and poor sanitation that may increase the chances of disease transmission. Poverty may also lead to lack of access to medical care and air and water pollution and increased crime rates that may also be risk factors and may lead to high mortality rates as. In contrast, the rich people have exposure to excellent health services and proper drainage systems that reduce their risk of disease transmission.
Beck (2007) says that social support has a relationship with immunity in both man and animals. Social support affects people differently. For instance, those with more social ties are less prone to pregnancy complications as well as diseases like arthritis; and it may also lead to a quick recovery after an accident or surgery. Similarly, in a community where there are a lot of children, there are low chances of diagnosing high blood pressure Human Health Psychology. Also, other factors such as marriage and belonging to a denomination as well as other aspects of social support are predictors of mortality rates even when all other factors are put into consideration. However, relationships like unhappy marriages lead to cognitive stress and depression, and in such cases, there is no social support according to Beck (2007).
There is a relationship between stress response and the health of an individual as we have earlier discussed, and if the reaction to stress is persistent, then it may lead to health complications. Beck (207) says that other social status and social support are correlated in response to stress and health status, and therefore both can be used in the control of social, as well as physical environments. However, there are other factors that may cause illness and social interactions which may later lead to stress. Local norms of the society, for example, may expose individuals to stress due to their gender, in most cases, women undergo the stresses due to male chauvinism. Also, we see that social support works best for people who do not have deformities.
Social support influences the behavior of a person by altering psychological functioning. They also affect the way the stressors occur and can relieve someone of a stressful situation. Social support and status can mitigate stress under certain circumstances. For example, during disasters and calamities, a lot of people are displaced, and that leads to losing of home by many citizens, security stress, lack of food and many other things that might be a threat to one’s health. Those who have higher social status do find shelter food and support from their neighbors and their many friends hence relieving them of their problems and thus have a lower risk of getting ill or suffering from depression. On the other hand, those with little social status are displaced and forced to stay out in the cold, and even go hungry with no one to come to their rescue. Due to harsh environmental conditions, stress, and lack of proper nutrition, they are at a very high risk of attack by diseases. Similarly, during the crisis, people with a senior social status and those respected like the church leaders receive some favors. Human Health Psychology.
Those who are already ill can recover faster than usual in the presence of social support as compared to those who are in isolation with no one to care for them. Also high social status can be a guarantee to better medication. For example, when there is a strike of medical personnel most of the public hospitals either do not work, or the services are very poor, and emergency services are prolonged. In cases when one fall ill of severe ailments like cancer, those of high social status will either take their people for medication in private health facilities or otherwise go abroad for treatment while their poor counterparts die for lack of money and support (Beck, 2007). There are additional factors that can affect health even though they also contribute to the status of a person, stress and hence control. For example, possession of knowledge and resources lead to a higher control.
Status and support are the major controllers of the environment. Individuals with high social status will always be surrounded by people who just want to offer their support or those who wish to share their leisure. On the other hand, those with low status are left in isolation due to their tight work schedule and hence limited leisure time, which leaves them feeling alone and it triggers the production of a lot of stressors and epinephrine that are a threat to one’s health.
Conclusion
Many factors can lead to an individual’s response to support, and as such, it depends on the beholder. Sex also determines an individual’s response to stress for example females may respond to pressure by producing oxytocin which is inhibited by the androgens of a male. For this reason,females are prone to react to pressure by “fight or flight” ways. Neither humans nor animals struggle to elevate their socials status or get social support for health purposes but survival means. Most individuals are not even concerned by the health effects that come as a result of this social support; however, we learn that we should keep our relationships and marriages healthy as this would determine the level of our stresses and hence our health.
Reference
Beck, L. (2007). Social status, social support, and stress: A comparative review of the health consequences of social control factors. Health Psychology Review, 1(2), 186-207.
INSTRUCTIONS
Title Page
Overview
1. Statement of the hypothesis investigated or purpose of the article.
2. Brief review of relevant past research, assumptions, or theory.
Content
1. List the key ideas presented in the article.
2. Briefly describe the research methodology used (if appropriate)
3. Findings and interpretations Human Health Psychology.
Conclusions
1. Integration with textbook content
2. Brief statement of what you have learned from the article
Reference Page – Do NOT use ANY nonprofessional journal references in your paper.
-Be scientific. Model your writing on the writing on the writing style of the journal article you are reviewing. Every sentence should be either clearly your opinion, obviously common sense, or cited in the text.
-Integrate and synthesize what you are reading. Reserve your opinions for the final section.
-Avoid quoting. Quotes should very rarely ever be necessary. It\’s your job to integrate and synthesize what you have read.
-Avoid gross general grammatical errors (examples: apostrophe where inappropriate, sentence fragment, flawed sentence structure invalidating the meaning of a sentence).
-Avoid misspelled words (this would not include words with multiple acceptable spelling such as counsel(l)ing, this would include misspellings such as too when two was intended) Human Health Psychology.
-Avoid incontrovertible stylistic APA errors (examples: failing to italicize the volume of a journal in a reference, use of a clear anthropomorphism such as “the purpose of the article is,” this does not include stylistic issues where multiple solutions are possible or where the APA style guide is unclear)
-Avoid editing errors (examples: repeating words, failing to indent a paragraph, failing to capitalize the first word of a sentence).
-Avoid unsupported or misattributed statements in paragraphs prior to the final paragraph (examples: stating that group A engages in a particular behavior without crediting a supporting source, stating that group A engages in a particular behavior when the content of the reviewed article contradicts such a statement, stating that group A engages in a particular behavior and citing the wrong source as support)
-Avoid overstated generalizations prior to final paragraph (unsupported means you have no data or reference to support your generalization, example: all dogs love to play fetch, or all cats like to be scratched behind their ears) Human Health Psychology.