Mitigating Risk For Anxiety Among Preschool-Age Children Living In Poverty: Evaluating The Impact Of Adult-Provided Social Support On Autonomic Stress Reactivity

Poverty increases children's exposure to stress, elevating their risk for developing patterns of heightened sympathetic and parasympathetic stress reactivity. Repeated patterns of high sympathetic activation and parasympathetic withdrawal place children at risk for anxiety disorders. This study evaluated whether providing social support to preschool-age children during mildly stressful situations helps reduce reactivity, and whether this effect partly depends on children's previously assessed baseline reactivity patterns. The Biological Sensitivity to Context (BSC) theory proposes that highly reactive children may be more sensitive than less reactive children to all environmental influences, including social support. In contrast, conventional physiological reactivity (CPR) theory contends that highly reactive children are more vulnerable to the impact of stress but are less receptive to the potential benefits present within their social environments. In this study, baseline autonomic reactivity patterns were measured. Children were then randomly assigned to a high-support or neutral control condition, and the effect of social support on autonomic response patterns was assessed. Results revealed an interaction between baseline reactivity profiles and experimental condition. Children with patterns of high-reactivity reaped more benefits from the social support in the experimental condition than did their less reactive peers. Highly reactive children experienced relatively less reactivity reduction in the neutral condition while experiencing relatively greater reactivity reduction in the support condition. Despite their demonstrated stability over time, reactivity patterns are also quite susceptible to change at this age; therefore understanding how social support ameliorates reactivity will further efforts to avert stable patterns of high-reactivity among children with high levels of stress, ultimately reducing risk for anxiety disorders.

The Affective Dimensions of Social Controversy

Social controversy is a sustained, mediated debate between at least two oppositional parties which is more than just a difference of opinion; rather it is a persistent conflict over the political and cultural implications that dominant forms of communicative reasoning, practices, and norms have for a public. Simply put, during social controversies the norms guiding public life can be negotiated, reaffirmed, negated, and/or transformed. This can lead to progressive political, cultural, and/or social change in some instances, while establishing or reifying conservative and even oppressive norms, practices, and laws in others. Building upon Olson and Goodnight's (1994) theoretical and methodological framework of social controversy, this dissertation argues that scholars should analyze the role affect plays in this type of conflict as a means to address the regulation of public conduct as well as public discourse. The rhetorical and argumentative significance of the affective dimensions of social controversy have been conceptualized and analyzed via an examination of emotion-based claims and affective states that have become salient, discernable and/or apprehendable during specific public disagreements. Such a conceptualization demonstrates that critical insights regarding the norms that guide public conduct, the role risk and vulnerability play in the regulation of individuals' public behavior, and the relationship between affect and citizenship can be gained by focusing on a controversy's affective dimensions. To highlight the importance of the study of affect in social controversy as well as better understand the larger critical significance affect theory has for rhetorical and argumentation studies, this dissertation has analyzed the affective dimensions of three conflicts. They are: the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse social controversy, the International Freedom Center social controversy, and the controversy over the 2004 French ban on conspicuous religious attire in public schools. The findings from this dissertation that have specific and general implications for future work in the field of controversy as well as rhetoric and argumentation, respectively.

The role of the social environment in non-suicidal self-injury among LGBTQ youth: A mixed methods study

Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), such as cutting and burning, is a widespread social problem among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth. Extant research indicates that this population is more than twice as likely to engage in NSSI than heterosexual and cisgender (non-transgender) youth. Despite the scope of this social problem, it remains relatively unexamined in the literature. Research on other risk behaviors among LGBTQ youth indicates that experiencing homophobia and transphobia in key social contexts such as families, schools, and peer relationships contributes to health disparities among this group. Consequently, the aims of this study were to examine: (1) the relationship between LGBTQ youth's social environments and their NSSI behavior, and (2) whether/how specific aspects of the social environment contribute to an understanding of NSSI among LGBTQ youth. This study was conducted using an exploratory, sequential mixed methods design with two phases. The first phase of the study involved analysis of transcripts from interviews conducted with 44 LGBTQ youth recruited from a community-based organization. In this phase, five qualitative themes were identified: (1) Violence; (2) Misconceptions, Stigma, and Shame; (3) Negotiating LGBTQ Identity; (4) Invisibility and Isolation; and (5) Peer Relationships. Results from the qualitative phase were used to identify key variables and specify statistical models in the second, quantitative, phase of the study, using secondary data from a survey of 252 LGBTQ youth. The qualitative phase revealed how LGBTQ youth, themselves, described the role of the social environment in their NSSI behavior, while the quantitative phase was used to determine whether the qualitative findings could be used to predict engagement in NSSI among a larger sample of LGBTQ youth. The quantitative analyses found that certain social-environmental factors such as experiencing physical abuse at home, feeling unsafe at school, and greater openness about sexual orientation significantly predicted the likelihood of engaging in NSSI among LGBTQ youth. Furthermore, depression partially mediated the relationships between family physical abuse and NSSI and feeling unsafe at school and NSSI. The qualitative and quantitative results were compared in the interpretation phase to explore areas of convergence and incongruence. Overall, this study's findings indicate that social-environmental factors are salient to understanding NSSI among LGBTQ youth. The particular social contexts in which LGBTQ youth live significantly influence their engagement in this risk behavior. These findings can inform the development of culturally relevant NSSI interventions that address the social realities of LGBTQ youth's lives.