Ch01 Print indd

Stage 4.  The body returns to homeostasis, a state of 

physiological calmness, once the threat is gone.

It is hypothesized that the fight-or-flight response 

developed primarily against threats of a physical nature, 

those that jeopardized the survival of the individual. 

Although clear physical threats still exist in today’s cul-

ture, including possible terrorism, they are nowhere 

near as prevalent as those threats perceived by the mind 

and, more specifically, the ego. In a theory put forward 

by a disciple of Selye’s, Simeons (1961), and repeated by 

Sapolsky (1998), it is suggested that, in effect, the fight-

or-flight response is an antiquated mechanism that 

has not kept evolutionary pace with the development 

of the human mind. Consequently, the stress response 

becomes activated in all types of threats, not just phys-

ical intimidations. The physiological repercussions can, 

and do, prove fatal. The body enters a state of physical 

readiness when you are about to receive your final exam 

grades or walk into an important meeting late, just as 

it does when you sense someone is following you late at 

night in an unlit parking lot. Moreover, this same stress 

response kicks in, to the same degree and intensity, 

even when the threat is wholly imaginary, in reaction to 

everything from monsters hiding under your bed when 

you were 4 years old, to the unsubstantiated idea that 

your boss doesn’t like you anymore and is out to get you.

Cannon noted the activation of several physiological 

mechanisms in this fight-or-flight response, affecting 

nearly every physiological system in the body, for the 

preparation of movement and energy production. 

These are just a few of the reactions:

1.  Increased heart rate to pump oxygenated blood 

to working muscles

2.  Increased blood pressure to deliver blood to 

working muscles

3.  Increased ventilation to supply working muscles 

with oxygen for energy metabolism

4.  Vasodilation of arteries to the body’s periphery 

(arms and legs) with the greatest muscle mass

5.  Increased serum glucose for metabolic processes 

during muscle contractions

6.  Increased free fatty acid mobilization as an energy 

source for prolonged activity (e.g., running)

7.  Increased blood coagulation and decreased clot-

ting time in the event of bleeding

The Stress Response

In 1914, Harvard physiologist Walter Cannon first 

coined the term fight-or-flight response to describe the 

dynamics involved in the body’s physiological arousal to 

survive a threat. In a series of animal studies, Cannon 

noted that the body prepares itself for one of two modes 

of immediate action: to attack or fight and defend 

oneself from the pursuing threat, or to run and escape 

the ensuing danger. What Cannon observed was the 

body’s reaction to acute stress, what is now commonly 

called the stress reaction. Additional observations sug-

gested that the fight response was triggered by anger or 

aggression and was usually employed to defend territo-

rial boundaries or attack aggressors equal or smaller in 

size. The fight response required physiological prepa-

rations that would recruit power and strength for a 

short duration, or what is now described as short but 

intense anaerobic work. Conversely, the flight response, 

he thought, was induced by fear. It was designed to fuel 

the body to endure prolonged movement such as run-

ning away from lions and bears. In many cases, how-

ever, it included not only fleeing but also hiding or 

withdrawal. (A variation on the flight response is the 

freeze response, often noted with post-traumatic stress 

disorder, where a person simply freezes, like a deer 

staring into a car’s headlights.) The human body, in all 

its metabolic splendor, actually prepares itself to do both 

(fight and flight) at the same time. In terms of evolu-

tion, it appears that this dynamic was so advantageous 

to survival that it developed in nearly all mammalian 

species, including us. (Some experts now suggest, how-

ever, that our bodies have not adapted to the stress-

induced lifestyles of the 21st century.)

In simple terms, there are four stages of the fight-or-

flight response:

Stage 1.  Stimuli from one or more of the five senses are 

sent to the brain (e.g., a scream, the smell of fire, the 

taste of poison, a passing truck in your lane).

Stage 2.  The brain deciphers the stimulus as either a 

threat or a nonthreat. If the stimulus is not regarded as 

a threat, this is the end of the response (e.g., the scream 

came from the television). If, however, the response is 

decoded as a real threat, the brain then activates the 

nervous and endocrine systems to quickly prepare for 

defense and/or escape.

Stage 3.  The body stays activated, aroused, or “keyed-

up” until the threat is over.

 

The Nature of Stress

7

9781284103625_CH01_Print.indd   7

12/4/15   4:20 PM

---

Not only do men and women have differences in their 

stress physiology, but there appears to be gender- specific 

behaviors for discussing and solving problems as well. 

Whereas men tend to think their way through by 

looking for solutions to problems, women like to talk 

about problems. Women bond quickly by sharing con-

fidences. However, although talking may be beneficial, 

researchers note that merely talking about stressors 

tends to perpetuate rather than solve one’s stressors. 

Researchers refer to stress-based conversations as 

“co-rumination.” Although talking may strengthen 

female friendships, it is also known to increase anxiety 

and depression if solutions aren’t introduced quickly. 

Experts warn against “unhealthy rumination” and the 

emotional contagion that results from it (Stepp, 2007).

It is fair to say that the concepts of survival are complex 

and perhaps not so neatly packaged by hormones or 

gender. Women are known to back-stab their “friends” 

and regrettably, on occasion, ditch their newborn 

babies in dumpsters and run away. Conversely, some 

men choose peace over violence (Gandhi and Martin 

Luther King, Jr., come to mind) and, when times get 

tough, men are known to bond together over a beer or 

game of golf.

Types of Stress

To the disbelief of some, not all stress is bad for you. 

In fact, there are many who believe that humans need 

some degree of stress to stay healthy. The human body 

craves homeostasis, or physiological calm, yet it also 

requires physiological arousal to ensure the optimal 

functioning of several organs, including the heart 

and musculoskeletal system. How can stress be good? 

When stress serves as a positive motivation, it is consid-

ered beneficial. Beyond this optimal point, stress of any 

kind does more harm than good.

Actually, there are three kinds of stress: eustress, neu-

stress, and distress. Eustress is good stress and arises 

in any situation or circumstance that a person finds 

motivating or inspiring. Falling in love might be an 

example of eustress; meeting a movie star or profes-

sional athlete may also be a type of eustress. Usually, 

situations that are classified as eustress are enjoyable 

and for this reason are not considered to be a threat. 

Neustress describes sensory stimuli that have no con-

sequential effect; it is considered neither good nor 

bad. News of an earthquake in a remote corner of the 

8.  Increased muscular strength

9.  Decreased gastric movement and abdominal 

blood flow to allow blood to go to working 

muscles

10.  Increased perspiration to cool body-core 

temperature

Unfortunately, the metabolic and physiological 

changes that are deemed essential for human move-

ment in the event of attack, pursuit, or challenge 

are quite ineffective when dealing with events or 

situations that threaten the ego, such as receiving a 

parking ticket or standing in a long line at the gro-

cery store, yet the body responds identically to all 

types of perceived threats.

Tend and Befriend

Do women respond differently to stress than men? 

The answer may seem obvious.

Generally speaking, men are prone to act more hostile 

whereas women have a proclivity to be more nurturing. 

Yet until recently every source on stress addressed the 

fight-or-flight response as if it were the only human 

default response. It was the work of Shelley Taylor and 

colleagues that filled in the missing piece with regard to 

the female response to stress. Curious about why only 

men were studied to formulate the basis for the fight-

or-flight response, Taylor hypothesized that the stress 

response needed to be reexamined, this time including 

astute observations of the female gender. In 2000 Taylor 

and colleagues proposed a new theory for the female 

stress response that they termed tend and befriend. 

Although both men and women have a built-in 

dynamic for the survival of physical danger, women also 

have an inherent nurturing response for their offspring 

as well as a means to befriend others. This in turn cre-

ates a strong social support system, an invaluable coping 

technique. Taylor suggests that the female response to 

stress is hardwired into the DNA and revealed through 

a combination of brain chemistry and hormones. The 

biological basis for tend and befriend appears to be 

the hormone oxytocin, now regarded as the “trusting 

hormone” or the social affiliation hormone. Although 

oxytocin is found in both women and men (to a lesser 

degree), estrogen is known to enhance the effects of oxy-

tocin in the brain. Generational social factors may sup-

port the tend-and-befriend behavior pattern as well.

Chapter 1

8

9781284103625_CH01_Print.indd   8

12/4/15   4:20 PM

---