Affective and cardiovascular responding to unpleasant events from adolescence to old age: Complexity of events matters.

Abstract

Two studies investigated the overpowering hypothesis as a possible explanation for the currently inconclusive empirical picture on age differences in affective responding to unpleasant events. The overpowering hypothesis predicts that age differences in affective responding are particularly evident in highly resource-demanding situations that overtax older adults' capacities. In Study 1, we used a mobile phone-based experience-sampling technology in 378 participants 14 -86 years of age. Participants reported their momentary negative affect and occurrences of unpleasant events on average 54 times over 3 weeks. In Study 2, a subsample of 92 participants wore an ambulatory psycho-physiological monitoring system for 24 hr while pursuing their daily routines and additionally completed an average of 7 mobile phone-based experience-sampling reports. Affective responding was analyzed by comparing, within persons, affective states in situations without and with preceding unpleasant events. Results support the overpowering hypothesis: When dealing with complex unpleasant events that affected multiple life domains, both psychological (Study 1) and cardiovascular (Study 2) responding to unpleasant events were more pronounced the older the participants were. When dealing with circumscribed unpleasant events, however, no age differences in psychological responding were observed (Study 1), and cardiovascular responding was even less pronounced the older the participants were (Study 2). These findings are consistent with the notion of preserved affect regulation throughout adulthood, as long as the resource demands exerted by an event do not overtax the individual's capacities. We conclude that the overpowering hypothesis can bridge previously opposing positions regarding age differences in affective responding.

Emotional Experience Across Adulthood

“…For example, in a study reviewed previously, compared with younger people, older adults showed reduced heart rate variability (i.e., poorer physiological regulation) only when they encountered stressor overloads (Wrzus et al, 2013). In another study of participants ranging from 34 to 85 years old, when adults older than 50 years experienced more distress than usual, they also had greater levels of daily cortisol output (Piazza, Charles, Stawski, & Almeida, 2013).…”

Aging and emotions: experience, regulation, and perception

“…Older age has been linked with less stressor diversity, which predicts greater affective well-being [27]. In contrast, the ability to respond to stressors may be weakened in older age when negative events affect more than one life domain [28]. …”

Affect dynamics across the lifespan: With age, heart rate reacts less strongly, but recovers more slowly from unpleasant emotional situations.

“…In contrast, avoidance of interpersonal conflicts led to less reactivity in negative affect among older people (Charles et al, 2009). However, facing complex hassle situations (Wrzus et al, 2013) or experiencing intense sadness (Kunzmann & Grühn, 2005;Seider et al, 2011) led to stronger experiential and physiological reactivity among older people. Sadness is assumed to be highly relevant in older adulthood because of its association with loss and goal disengagement (Smith & Lazarus, 1993;Streubel & Kunzmann, 2011).…”

“…Resulting from the acquired strengths and vulnerabilities, affective well-being is assumed to be more stable and better with older age as long as the emotional situation does not overtax the individual's limited resources; within these limits, reactivity to emotional situations should be less pronounced with older age. Yet when emotional situations exceed the available resources, high levels of distress, and/or of physiological arousal, are assumed to occur and to be more pronounced with older age (Charles & Luong, 2013;Labouvie-Vief, Gilet, & Mella, 2014;Wrzus, Müller, Wagner, Lindenberger, & Riediger, 2013). In addition, SAVI postulates that under the latter circumstances, people need more time to recover because of a diminished physiological flexibility and difficulties in dealing with highly distressing experiences.…”