Research shows that a large increase in background noise at a constant, steady level is experienced as less intrusive as time passes; although prolonged exposure produces lasting elevations in blood pressure.1 If the noise is not only loud, but also intermittent, then people remain conscious of their heightened irritability even after an extended period of adaptation; and their symptoms of central nervous system distress become more pronounced.1
In a laboratory, subjects exposed to a loud, intermittent, and unpredictable noise experience not only showed physiological symptoms of stress but also behavioural symptoms. These subjects became less persistent in their attempts to cope with frustrating tasks, and suffered measurable impairments in performing tasks requiring care and attention.1
In another ingenious experiment, the Psychologist David Glass and his collaborators exposed two groups of subjects to a recording of loud, unpredictable noises. And, whereas subjects in one group had no control over the recording, subjects in the other group could stop the tape at any time simply by flipping a switch. These subjects were told, however, that the researchers would prefer that they not stop the tape, and indeed most of them honoured this preference. Following exposure to the noise, subjects with access to the control switch made almost 60 percent fewer errors than the other subjects on a proofreading task, and made more than four times as many attempts to solve a difficult puzzle.1
Similarly, commuting though heavy traffic is in many ways very stressful, and much more like exposure to loud, unpredictable noises than to constant background noise. Delays are difficult to predict, virtually impossible to control, and one never quite gets used to being cut up by other drivers who believe that their time is more valuable than anyone else’s. Thus, a large amount of scientific literature documents the many stress symptoms that result from protracted driving through heavy traffic.
One theme in this body of knowledge focuses on the experiences of Bus drivers, whose exposure to the stresses of heavy traffic is higher than that of most other road users, but who have also had greater opportunities to adapt to those stresses. Compared to workers in other occupations, a disproportionate share of the absenteeism experienced by Bus drivers stems from stress-related illnesses such as gastrointestinal problems, headaches, and anxiety.2 Many studies have found sharply elevated rates of hypertension among city Bus drivers relative to a variety of control groups, including, in one instance, Bus drivers themselves during their pre-employment physical examinations.3,4 And, additional studies have found elevations of stress hormones such as Adrenaline, Noradrenalin, and Cortisol in town Bus drivers.4 One study even found elevations of Adrenaline and Noradrenalin to be strongly positively correlated with the density of the traffic with which the Bus drivers had to contend.5 And, more than half of all urban Bus drivers retire prematurely with some form of medical disability.6
Your daily commute through heavy traffic is presumably less stressful than operating a bus all day in a busy town. And probably much less stressful than meeting an attractive member of the opposite sex somewhere. Yet, there is no question that the differences are one of degree rather than kind. Studies have shown that the demands of commuting through heavy traffic often result in emotional and behavioural deficits on arrival at home or at work.7 Compared to drivers who commute through low-density traffic, those who commute through heavy traffic are more likely to report feelings of annoyance.8 And at higher levels of commuting distance, time, speed, and months of commuting are significantly positively correlated with increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure.8
This prolonged experience of commuting stress also suppresses immune function and shortens longevity.9,8 Even spells in traffic as brief as fifteen minutes have been linked to significant elevations of blood glucose and cholesterol, and to declines in blood coagulation time (all factors that are positively associated with heart disease). Commuting by car is also linked positively with the incidence of various cancers, especially cancer of the lung, although this is probably because of higher exposure to exhaust fumes.10 Among people who commute to work, the incidence of these and other illnesses rises with the length of commute,10 and is significantly lower amongst those who commute by bus or rail,11 and lower still amongst non-commuters.12
In conclusion, there appears to be persistent and significant costs associated with long commutes through heavy traffic. And we can also be confident that Neurophysiologists would find higher levels of Cortisol, Norepinephrine, Adrenaline, Noradrenalin, and other stress hormones in a seducer who is in a situation that they feel they have no control over. Of course, nobody has done the experiment to discover whether poorly skilled seducers would report lower levels of life satisfaction than the rest of the population. But, because we know that drivers often report being consciously aware of the frustration and stress they experience during commuting, it is a plausible conjecture that subjective well-being, as conventionally measured, would be lower in those seducers. However, even if the negative effects of stress never broke through into conscious awareness, we would still have powerful reasons for wishing to escape them.
References:
In a laboratory, subjects exposed to a loud, intermittent, and unpredictable noise experience not only showed physiological symptoms of stress but also behavioural symptoms. These subjects became less persistent in their attempts to cope with frustrating tasks, and suffered measurable impairments in performing tasks requiring care and attention.1
In another ingenious experiment, the Psychologist David Glass and his collaborators exposed two groups of subjects to a recording of loud, unpredictable noises. And, whereas subjects in one group had no control over the recording, subjects in the other group could stop the tape at any time simply by flipping a switch. These subjects were told, however, that the researchers would prefer that they not stop the tape, and indeed most of them honoured this preference. Following exposure to the noise, subjects with access to the control switch made almost 60 percent fewer errors than the other subjects on a proofreading task, and made more than four times as many attempts to solve a difficult puzzle.1
Similarly, commuting though heavy traffic is in many ways very stressful, and much more like exposure to loud, unpredictable noises than to constant background noise. Delays are difficult to predict, virtually impossible to control, and one never quite gets used to being cut up by other drivers who believe that their time is more valuable than anyone else’s. Thus, a large amount of scientific literature documents the many stress symptoms that result from protracted driving through heavy traffic.
One theme in this body of knowledge focuses on the experiences of Bus drivers, whose exposure to the stresses of heavy traffic is higher than that of most other road users, but who have also had greater opportunities to adapt to those stresses. Compared to workers in other occupations, a disproportionate share of the absenteeism experienced by Bus drivers stems from stress-related illnesses such as gastrointestinal problems, headaches, and anxiety.2 Many studies have found sharply elevated rates of hypertension among city Bus drivers relative to a variety of control groups, including, in one instance, Bus drivers themselves during their pre-employment physical examinations.3,4 And, additional studies have found elevations of stress hormones such as Adrenaline, Noradrenalin, and Cortisol in town Bus drivers.4 One study even found elevations of Adrenaline and Noradrenalin to be strongly positively correlated with the density of the traffic with which the Bus drivers had to contend.5 And, more than half of all urban Bus drivers retire prematurely with some form of medical disability.6
Your daily commute through heavy traffic is presumably less stressful than operating a bus all day in a busy town. And probably much less stressful than meeting an attractive member of the opposite sex somewhere. Yet, there is no question that the differences are one of degree rather than kind. Studies have shown that the demands of commuting through heavy traffic often result in emotional and behavioural deficits on arrival at home or at work.7 Compared to drivers who commute through low-density traffic, those who commute through heavy traffic are more likely to report feelings of annoyance.8 And at higher levels of commuting distance, time, speed, and months of commuting are significantly positively correlated with increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure.8
This prolonged experience of commuting stress also suppresses immune function and shortens longevity.9,8 Even spells in traffic as brief as fifteen minutes have been linked to significant elevations of blood glucose and cholesterol, and to declines in blood coagulation time (all factors that are positively associated with heart disease). Commuting by car is also linked positively with the incidence of various cancers, especially cancer of the lung, although this is probably because of higher exposure to exhaust fumes.10 Among people who commute to work, the incidence of these and other illnesses rises with the length of commute,10 and is significantly lower amongst those who commute by bus or rail,11 and lower still amongst non-commuters.12
In conclusion, there appears to be persistent and significant costs associated with long commutes through heavy traffic. And we can also be confident that Neurophysiologists would find higher levels of Cortisol, Norepinephrine, Adrenaline, Noradrenalin, and other stress hormones in a seducer who is in a situation that they feel they have no control over. Of course, nobody has done the experiment to discover whether poorly skilled seducers would report lower levels of life satisfaction than the rest of the population. But, because we know that drivers often report being consciously aware of the frustration and stress they experience during commuting, it is a plausible conjecture that subjective well-being, as conventionally measured, would be lower in those seducers. However, even if the negative effects of stress never broke through into conscious awareness, we would still have powerful reasons for wishing to escape them.
References:
1. Glass, D.C., J. Singer & J. Pennebaker, ‘Behavioral and Psychological Effects of Uncontrollable Environmental Events’ (1977) in Perspectives on Environment and Behavior, ed. D. Stokols, New York: Plenum
2. Long, L. & J. Perry, ‘Economic and Occupational Causes of Transit Operator Absenteeism: A Review of Research’ (1985) Transport Review 5:247-267
3. Ragland, D.R., M. Winkleby, J. Schwalbe, B.L. Holman, L. Morse, L. Syme & J.M. Fisher, ‘Prevalence of Hypertension in Bus Drivers’ (1987) International Journal of Epidemiology, 16:208-214; Pikus, W.G. & W.A. Tarranikova, ‘The Frequency of Hypertensive Disease Among Drivers in Public Transportation’ (1975) Terapevischeskii Archives, 47:135-137
4. Evans, G.W., M.N. Palsane & S. Carrère, ‘Type A Behaviour and Occupational Stress: A Cross-cultural Study of Blue-collar Workers” (1987) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52:1002-1007
5. Evans, G.W. & S. Carrère, ‘Traffic Congestion, Perceived Control, and Psychophysiological Stress Among Urban Bus Drivers’ (1991) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76:658-663
6. Evans, G.W., ‘Working on the hot seat: Urban Bus Operators’ (1994) Accident Analysis and Prevention, 26:181-193
7. Glass, D.C., & J. Singer, ‘Urban Stressors: Experiments on Noise and Social Stressors’ (1972) New York: Academic Press; Sherrod, D.R., ‘Crowding, Perceived Control, and Behavioral Aftereffects’ (1974) Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4:171-186
8. Stokols, D., R.W. Novaco, J. Stokols & J. Campbell, ‘Traffic congestion, Type A Behaviour, and Stress’ (1978) Journal of Applied Psychology, 63:467–480
9. DeLongis A., S. Folkman, R.S. Lazarus, ‘The impact of Daily Stress on Health and Mood: Psychological and Social Resources as Mediators’ (1988) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54:486-495
10. Koslowsky, M., A.N. Kluger & M. Reich, ‘Commuting Stress‘ (1995) New York: Plenum
11. Taylor, P.J. & S.J. Pocock, ‘Commuter Travel and Sickness Absence of London Office Workers’ (1972) British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine, 26:165-172; Koslowsky, M. & M. Krausz, ‘On the Relationship Between Commuting, Stress Symptoms, and attitudinal Measures’ (1993) Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 29:485-492
12. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, ‘The Journey from Home to the Workplace: The Impact on the Safety and Health of the Commuters/Workers’ (1984) Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
2. Long, L. & J. Perry, ‘Economic and Occupational Causes of Transit Operator Absenteeism: A Review of Research’ (1985) Transport Review 5:247-267
3. Ragland, D.R., M. Winkleby, J. Schwalbe, B.L. Holman, L. Morse, L. Syme & J.M. Fisher, ‘Prevalence of Hypertension in Bus Drivers’ (1987) International Journal of Epidemiology, 16:208-214; Pikus, W.G. & W.A. Tarranikova, ‘The Frequency of Hypertensive Disease Among Drivers in Public Transportation’ (1975) Terapevischeskii Archives, 47:135-137
4. Evans, G.W., M.N. Palsane & S. Carrère, ‘Type A Behaviour and Occupational Stress: A Cross-cultural Study of Blue-collar Workers” (1987) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52:1002-1007
5. Evans, G.W. & S. Carrère, ‘Traffic Congestion, Perceived Control, and Psychophysiological Stress Among Urban Bus Drivers’ (1991) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76:658-663
6. Evans, G.W., ‘Working on the hot seat: Urban Bus Operators’ (1994) Accident Analysis and Prevention, 26:181-193
7. Glass, D.C., & J. Singer, ‘Urban Stressors: Experiments on Noise and Social Stressors’ (1972) New York: Academic Press; Sherrod, D.R., ‘Crowding, Perceived Control, and Behavioral Aftereffects’ (1974) Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4:171-186
8. Stokols, D., R.W. Novaco, J. Stokols & J. Campbell, ‘Traffic congestion, Type A Behaviour, and Stress’ (1978) Journal of Applied Psychology, 63:467–480
9. DeLongis A., S. Folkman, R.S. Lazarus, ‘The impact of Daily Stress on Health and Mood: Psychological and Social Resources as Mediators’ (1988) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54:486-495
10. Koslowsky, M., A.N. Kluger & M. Reich, ‘Commuting Stress‘ (1995) New York: Plenum
11. Taylor, P.J. & S.J. Pocock, ‘Commuter Travel and Sickness Absence of London Office Workers’ (1972) British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine, 26:165-172; Koslowsky, M. & M. Krausz, ‘On the Relationship Between Commuting, Stress Symptoms, and attitudinal Measures’ (1993) Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 29:485-492
12. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, ‘The Journey from Home to the Workplace: The Impact on the Safety and Health of the Commuters/Workers’ (1984) Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
0 comments:
Post a Comment