Salivary cortisol responses to a psychosocial laboratory stressor and later verbal recall of the stressor: The role of trait and state rumination

Abstract

This study investigated whether trait rumination predicts greater increases in salivary cortisol concentration and delayed recovery in response to a standardized, acute laboratory psychosocial stressor (modified Trier Social Stress Test). It also tested whether trait and state rumination predict reactivation of the cortisol response during later verbal recall of the stressor. Fifty-nine undergraduates (31 females; 28 males) completed the stress protocol and returned 2 weeks later for a surprise interview about the first session, conducted in either a supportive or unsupportive context. Participants completed a measure of trait rumination and reported negative thoughts about the stressor in the 2 weeks between sessions (state rumination). Trait rumination was associated with greater reactivity of salivary cortisol level and delayed recovery from the stressor, F(1,310) = 6.77, p < 0.001. It also predicted greater cortisol reactivity when recalling the stressor, but only for males in the unsupportive interview context, F(2,119) = 7.53, p < 0.001. This effect was heightened for males who also scored high on state rumination, F(2,119) = 7.53, p < 0.001. Rumination was not associated with cortisol responses to the interviews in females. The findings indicate that rumination may play a role in prolonging cortisol stress responses through delayed recovery and reactivation and that rumination disposition and the context of stressor recall are important in understanding the rumination–cortisol response association.

Keywords::

• Cortisol
• perseverative cognition
• recall
• rumination
• sex difference
• TSST

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Robin Edelstein, Jennifer Piazza, and Cathy Hayakawa for assisting with data collection, Allison Wallin for her assistance in assaying cortisol, and the many undergraduate students who helped with data collection. We also greatly appreciate the time and assistance of the participants, without whom the study would not have been possible. The present study was funded by the National Science Foundation (BCS-0721377) and a Faculty Collaborative Grant from the University of California, Irvine. These funding sources had no role in study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Notes

^* Two additional participants only completed the first session and are not included in the present analyses; one failed to return for the second visit and the second withdrew from the study after the first session.

^† Fifty-six participants returned exactly 14 days later and three participants returned between 10 and 16 days later (mean ± SD = 13.95 ± 0.60). Delay between laboratory sessions did not differ as a function of experimental condition, t < 1.58, p>0.12.

^‡ Trait rumination intercept tested with time centered at 45 min post-stressor.