Effects of psychosocial stress on prosociality: the moderating role of current life stress and thought control

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual model. Note. HR: heart rate; NA: negative affect; TNT: think/no-think task. H1: Acute stress responses [(a) HR, (b) NA, (c) alpha-amylase, (d) cortisol] are negatively associated with prosociality [prosocial motivation, helping behavior]. H2: Current life stress moderates the relationship between acute stress responses [(a) HR, (b) NA, (c) alpha-amylase, (d) cortisol] and prosociality [prosocial motivation, helping behavior]. The negative relationship between acute stress responses and prosociality is stronger for individuals with high current life stress. H3: The thought control strategy moderates the effect of acute stress responses [(a) HR, (b) NA] on stress recovery [(a) HR, (b) NA] and prosociality [prosocial motivation, helping behavior] such that individuals with the thought control strategy should be less stressed and more prosocial. H4: Thought control ability and the thought control strategy moderate the effect of acute stress responses [(a) HR, (b) NA] on stress recovery [(a) HR, (b) NA] and prosociality [prosocial motivation, helping behavior] such that individuals with the ability to control thoughts and the thought control strategy should be less stressed and more prosocial.

A chart of the model of the underlying study with its proposed hypotheses.

Figure 2. Study phases.

An illustration of the several study phases and their underlying purpose.

Figure 3. Measurement points in Phase 4. Note. Base: baseline; ASR: acute stress response; Rec: later stress response; Strategy: thought control strategy; HR: heart rate; NA: negative affect; AA: alpha amylase; C: cortisol. NA, A, and C were measured at s0, s1, s2, s3, s4. HR was measured continuously.

An illustration of the measurement points in the fourth phase for heart rate, negative affect, alpha-amylase, and cortisol.

Table 1. Means standard deviations, and correlations for all study variables.

	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
1. Sex^a	1.49	0.51
2. Prosocial motivation	4.37	0.51	−0.28*
3. Helping behavior^b	0.64	0.49	0.21	−0.01
4. Current life stress	108.01	41.80	−0.18	−0.17	0.01
5. Thought control strategy^c	0.49	0.51	−0.02	0.09	0.06	0.10
6. Thought control ability	0.06	0.18	0.13	0.03	0.11	0.03	0.09
7. Heart rate baseline^d	74.75	11.80	−0.53**	0.06	−0.10	0.04	0.01	−0.08
8. Heart rate acute stress response^d	100.86	17.80	−0.28*	0.13	−0.04	0.09	0.15	−0.05	0.70**
9. Heart rate recovery^d	76.55	11.10	−0.46**	0.14	−0.09	0.02	0.11	−0.10	0.88**	0.77**
10. Negative affect baseline (s1)	1.19	0.25	−0.19	−0.15	−0.01	−0.06	−0.06	−0.20	0.11	−0.02	0.11
11. Negative affect acute stress response (s2)	1.86	0.73	−0.30*	0.31*	0.15	0.05	−0.10	−0.05	0.19	0.07	0.14	0.19
12. Negative affect recovery (s3)	1.41	0.55	−0.07	0.13	0.22	−0.12	−0.27*	−0.06	0.11	0.07	0.07	0.39**	0.75**
13. Salivary alpha-amylase baseline (s1)	93.72	73.20	−0.05	−0.18	0.06	−0.11	0.08	0.12	0.04	0.07	0.19	0.09	−0.20	−0.23
14. Salivary alpha-amylase acute stress response^e (s2)	151.9	89.30	0.08	−0.08	0.34*	−0.02	−0.08	0.02	0.06	0.08	0.05	0.16	−0.06	0.05	0.55**
15. Salivary cortisol baseline^e (s2)	4.02	2.69	0.31*	−0.10	0.12	0.16	0.01	−0.06	−0.02	0.09	−0.02	−0.01	0.09	0.20	0.09	0.18
16. Salivary cortisol acute stress response^e (s3)	6.44	4.72	0.30*	0.01	0.17	0.12	0.19	−0.15	0.04	0.21	0.05	−0.20	−0.03	0.07	−0.02	0.09	0.70**

Note. N = 55.

^aFemale = 1, male = 2; ^bno helping behavior occurred = 0, helping behavior occurred = 1; ^cControl group condition = 0, Experimental group condition = 1; ^dn = 54; ^en = 52.

*Indicates p < 0.05. **Indicates p < 0.01.

Table 2. Regression analyses predicting prosocial motivation.

		HR^a			NA			Alpha Amylase			Cortisol^b
		Estimate	p	R² [F]	Estimate	p	R² [F]	Estimate	p	R² [F]	Estimate	p	R² [F]
Control variables	Intercept	5.236***	0.000	0.079 [(2,53) = 2.193, p = 0.122]	5.353***	0.000	0.117 [(2,54) = 3.437*, p = 0.040]	4.932***	0.000	0.113 [(2,54) = 3.319*, p = 0.044]	4.817***	0.000	0.087 [(2,51) = 2.333, p = 0.108]
	Sex	−0.329*	0.046		−0.318*	0.022		−0.288*	0.034		−0.302*	0.046
	Baseline stress value	−0.005	0.479		−0.425	0.125		−0.001	0.143		−0.001	0.974
Study variables	Current life stress	−0.012	0.091	0.187 [(6,53) = 1.796, p = 0.120]	−0.013*	0.044	0.270 [(6,54) = 2.959*, p = 0.015]	−0.013*	0.042	0.213 [(6,54) = 2.166, p = 0.063]	−0.009	0.215	0.179 [(6,51) = 1.638, p = 0.159]
	Thought control strategy	0.067	0.629		0.117	0.359		0.135	0.313		0.061	0.676
	Thought control ability	0.074	0.345		0.045	0.499		0.059	0.387		0.108	0.192
	Acute stress response	0.007	0.195		0.209*	0.026		0.001	0.448		0.027	0.236
Interaction	Acute stress response x current life stress	−0.0003	0.370	0.201 [(7,46) = 1.651, p = 0.145]	0.007	0.478	0.278 [(7,47) = 2.584*, p = 0.024]	0.000	0.856	0.214 [(7,47) = 1.824, p = 0.105]	−0.002	0.319	0.199 [(7,44) = 1.550, p = 0.176]
Interaction	Acute stress response x thought control strategy	−0.007	0.377	0.200 [(7,46) = 1.647, p = 0.146]	−0.134	0.459	0.279 [(7,47) = 2.593*, p = 0.024]	0.002	0.161	0.246 [(7,47) = 2.185, p = 0.053]	0.030	0.363	0.195 [(7,44) = 1.521, p = 0.186]
Interaction	Acute stress response x thought control ability	0.019*	0.018	0.079 [(10,43) = 1.925, p = 0.068]	0.001	0.995	0.079 [(10,44) = 1.02, p = 0.079]	0.001	0.364	0.261 [(10,44) = 1.555, p = 0.153]	0.054	0.103	0.256 [(10,41) = 1.412, p = 0.210]
	Thought control strategy x thought control ability	1.143	0.313		0.251	0.502		0.167	0.557		0.198	0.487
	Acute stress response x thought control strategy x thought control ability	−0.013	0.284		−0.145	0.469		−0.002	0.376		−0.039	0.333

Note. N = 55. The interaction terms were separately included in the models and have not been tested simultaneously. Only values of newly added terms were reported.

^an = 54, ^bn = 52, *Indicates p < .05. **Indicates p < .01. ***Indicates p < .001. HR: heart rate; NA: negative affect.

Table 3. Logistic regression analyses predicting helping behavior.

		HR^a			NA			Alpha Amylase			Cortisol^b
		Estimate	p	Nagelkerke R² [χ^2]	Estimate	p	Nagelkerke R² [χ^2]	Estimate	p	Nagelkerke R² [χ^2]	Estimate	p	Nagelkerke R² [χ^2]
Control variables	Intercept	−0.812	0.776	0.055 [(2) = 2.227, p = 0.328]	−1.094	0.547	0.063 [(2) = 2.570, p = 0.277]	−0.992	0.310	0.068 [(2) = 2.822, p = 0.244]	−0.707	0.437	0.049 [(2) = 1.920, p = 0.383]
	Sex	0.869	0.206		0.931	0.116		0.927	0.112		0.648	0.291
	Baseline stress value	0.001	0.971		0.249	0.835		0.002	0.590		0.062	0.604
Study variables	Current life stress	0.007	0.820	0.067 [(6) = 2.721, p = 0.843]	0.007	0.803	0.152 [(6) = 6.475, p = 0.372]	0.009	0.789	0.258 [(6) = 11.469, p = 0.075]	0.011	0.728	0.082 [(6) = 3.237, p = 0.779]
	Thought control strategy	−0.217	0.715		−0.360	0.553		−0.533	0.407		−0.092	0.880
	Thought control ability	0.183	0.599		0.256	0.455		0.244	0.501		0.264	0.464
	Acute stress response	0.002	0.945		0.749	0.104		0.013*	0.013		0.085	0.398
Interaction	Acute stress response x current life stress	−0.001	0.460	0.080 [(7) = 3.275, p = 0.858]	−0.064	0.216	0.189 [(7) = 8.152, p = 0.319]	0.0004	0.366	0.275 [(7) = 12.346, p = 0.090]	−0.025*	0.015	0.278 [(7) = 11.916, p = 0.103]
Interaction	Acute stress response x thought control strategy	0.058	0.133	0.124 [(7) = 5.158, p = 0.641]	−1.900	0.068	0.236 [(7) = 10.425, p = 0.166]	0.003	0.709	0.261 [(7) = 11.609, p = 0.114]	−0.201	0.204	0.124 [(7) = 4.993, p = 0.661]
Interaction	Acute stress response x thought control ability	0.056	0.137	0.208 [(10) = 8.918, p = 0.540]	0.018	0.984	0.413 [(10) = 19.734*, p = 0.032]	0.003	0.717	0.273 [(10) = 12.244, p = 0.269]	−0.009	0.955	0.126 [(10) = 5.049, p = 0.888]
	Thought control strategy x thought control ability	9.791	0.083		−7.572	0.065		−0.066	0.961		0.015	0.990
	Acute stress response x thought control strategy x thought control ability	−0.099	0.089		5.139	0.067		−0.004	0.668		0.022	0.911

Note. The interaction terms were separately included in the models and have not been tested simultaneously. Only values of newly added terms were reported.

N = 55; ^an = 54, ^bn = 52, *Indicates p < 0.05. ***Indicates p < 0.001. HR: heart rate; NA: negative affect.

Figure 4. The relationships between cortisol acute stress responses (low level: −1 SD, high level: +1SD) and helping behavior at low to high values of current life stress.

A graph showing a positive association between high salivary cortisol levels and helping behavior at low current life stress.

Figure 5. The relationships between negative affective acute stress responses at s2 (low level: −1 SD, high level: +1SD) and negative affective stress recovery at s3 in the EG and CG condition.

A graph showing that individuals in the EG had lower negative affect after applying the thought control strategy than individuals in the CG.

Table 4. Regression analyses predicting stress recovery at s3.

		HR^a			NA
		Estimate	p	R² [F]	Estimate	p	R² [F]
Control variables	Intercept	14.898*	0.047	0.768 [(2,53)=84.434***, p = 0.000]	0.364	0.416	0.155 [(2,54)=4.756*, p = 0.013
	Sex	0.070	0.968		0.004	0.978
	Baseline stress value	0.823***	0.000		0.878**	0.004
Study variables	Current life stress	−0.065	0.355	0.827 [(6,53)=37.369***, p = 0.000]	−0.005	0.253	0.687 [(6,54)=17.528***, p = 0.000]
	Thought control strategy	1.270	0.358		−0.186	0.044
	Thought control ability	−0.786	0.319		−0.008	0.871
	Acute stress response	0.193***	0.001		0.548***	0.000
Interaction	Acute stress response x thought control strategy	0.005	0.952	0.827 [(7,46)=31.353***, p=.000]	−0.410***	0.0007	0.755 [(7,47)=20.651***, p=.000]
Interaction	Acute stress response x thought control ability	−0.040	0.631	0.828 [(10,43)=20.046***, p = 0.000]	0.005	0.949	0.756 [(10,44)=13.603***, p = 0.000]
	Thought control strategy x thought control ability	0.018	0.999		−0.013	0.958
	Acute stress response x thought control strategy x thought control ability	0.005	0.970		0.024	0.851

Note. N = 55. The interaction terms were separately included in the models and have not been tested simultaneously. Only values of newly added terms were reported.

^an = 54, *Indicates p < .05. **Indicates p < .01. ***Indicates p < .001. HR: heart rate; NA: negative affect.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.