This paper reviews the currently popular definitions and theoretical arguments of the so-called "stress" perspective with the purpose of integrating this material into one general paradigm. The literature has been concerned primarily with two parallel processes which purport to account for the individual's coping and adaptive behavior, one characterized by the interplay of internal, psychological forces, and the other by external, environmenml factors. These rwo general processes have been integrated in this paper by expanding upon the general models presented by Dohrenwend ( 7 ) to include imporcant feedback processes. It is argued that adaptation to stress is a dynamic process and that the failure to adapt is often the result of a continuing process of past failures by the organism effectively to cope with less severe stressful stimuli, each failure feeding back to affect future attempts to cope with new environmental demands. The implications of the approach presented in this paper for future empirical investigation are discussed.
Definitional PreliminariesThe concept of stress has received considerable attention in recent years from both a conceptual and research as evidenced by two relatively recent conferences devoted exclusively to the subject ( 2 , 19). Although stress research has been prolific, one is struck when reviewing the stress literature by the lack of continuity of basic theoretical and operational constructs (19). Dispersed throughout the literature are bits and pieces of a potentially coherent model, but in few studies is there an attempt to develop a truly specific and dynamic stress-response model. Notable among exceptions to this are the researches of Kahn and his colleagues (16) concerning role conflict and ambiguity as sources of organizationally induced stress; the conceptual formulation of Dohrenwend ( 7 ) emphasizing the role of various types of internal and external mediating factors in the stress adjustment process, the subsequent work applying the same model to an investigation of mental disorder (8) ; and the research of Mechanic (20, 21) of students taking Ph.D. qualifying examinations and the stress-adaptation process which that event triggered. Although these models are notable in their attempts to identify salient elements of the stress-response process they all tend to lack a certain degree of dynamism in that important feedback mechanisms are often left vague and unspecified ( 7 ) . Further, the various definitions of stress employed in these and other studies have tended to em-'Special thanks are given to Walter Buckley for his valuable comments on an earlier version of this paper.