vanyzave premyla rozaleah
Karmen Mcarthun
Sieber and Stanley (1988) used the term social sensitivity to describe studies where there are potential social consequences for the participants or the group of people represented by the research.
Also, any research linking intelligence to genetic factors can be seen as socially sensitive. For example, Cyril Burt used studies of identical twins to support his view that intelligence is largely genetic. His views greatly influenced the Hadow Report (1926) which led to the creation of the 11+ which was used from 1944-1976. This meant that generations of children were affected by the 11+ exam, even though there has been huge controversy regarding whether Burt had falsified his research data.
To keep up-to-date with the tutor2u Psychology team, follow us on Twitter @tutor2uPsych, Facebook AQA / OCR / Edexcel / Student or subscribe to the Psychology Daily Digest and get new content delivered to your inbox!
The site is secure.
The ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Genes and culture are often thought of as opposite ends of the nature-nurture spectrum, but here we examine possible interactions. Genetic association studies suggest that variation within the genes of central neurotransmitter systems, particularly the serotonin (5-HTTLPR, MAOA-uVNTR) and opioid (OPRM1 A118G), are associated with individual differences in social sensitivity, which reflects the degree of emotional responsivity to social events and experiences. Here, we review recent work that has demonstrated a robust cross-national correlation between the relative frequency of variants in these genes and the relative degree of individualism-collectivism in each population, suggesting that collectivism may have developed and persisted in populations with a high proportion of putative social sensitivity alleles because it was more compatible with such groups. Consistent with this notion, there was a correlation between the relative proportion of these alleles and lifetime prevalence of major depression across nations. The relationship between allele frequency and depression was partially mediated by individualism-collectivism, suggesting that reduced levels of depression in populations with a high proportion of social sensitivity alleles is due to greater collectivism. These results indicate that genetic variation may interact with ecological and social factors to influence psychocultural differences.
Muthadie, Akinola, Koslov, and Mendes (2015) wondered if vagal flexibility might predict something about our emotional reactions to being in a social situation. They hypothesized that people with greater vagal flexibility (indicated by greater decreases in RSA during a demanding task) would show more social sensitivity in a social situation.
Sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) is a temperamental or personality trait involving "an increased sensitivity of the central nervous system and a deeper cognitive processing of physical, social, and emotional stimuli".[2] The trait is characterized by "a tendency to 'pause to check' in novel situations, greater sensitivity to subtle stimuli, and the engagement of deeper cognitive processing strategies for employing coping actions, all of which is driven by heightened emotional reactivity, both positive and negative".[3]
A human with a particularly high measure of SPS is considered to have "hypersensitivity", or be a highly sensitive person (HSP).[2][3] The terms SPS and HSP were coined in the mid-1990s by psychologists Elaine Aron and her husband Arthur Aron, who developed the Highly Sensitive Person Scale (HSPS) questionnaire by which SPS is measured.[3] Other researchers have applied various other terms to denote this responsiveness to stimuli that is seen in humans and other species.[4]
Elaine Aron's book The Highly Sensitive Person was published in 1996.[12] In 1997 Elaine and Arthur Aron formally identified[13] sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) as the defining trait of highly sensitive persons (HSPs).[3] The popular terms hypersensitivity (not to be confused with the medical term hypersensitivity) or highly sensitive are popular synonyms for the scientific concept of SPS.[2] By way of definition, Aron and Aron (1997) wrote that sensory processing here refers not to the sense organs themselves, but to what occurs as sensory information is transmitted to or processed in the brain.[13] They assert that the trait is not a disorder but an innate survival strategy that has both advantages and disadvantages.[10][11]
Elaine Aron's academic journal articles as well as self-help publications for the lay reader have focused on distinguishing high SPS from socially reticent behavior[14] and disorders[11][15] with which high SPS can be confused;[16] overcoming the social unacceptability that can cause low self-esteem;[16] and emphasizing the advantages of high SPS[17] to balance the disadvantages emphasized by others.[5][16][18]
In 2015, journalist Elizabeth Bernstein wrote in The Wall Street Journal that HSPs were "having a moment," noting that several hundred research studies had been conducted on topics related to HSPs' high sensitivity. The First International Scientific Conference on High Sensitivity or Sensory Processing Sensitivity was held at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel.[19] By 2015, more than a million copies of The Highly Sensitive Person had been sold.[20]
Research pre-dating the Arons' coining of the term "high sensitivity" includes that of German medicine professor Wolfgang Klages, who argued in the 1970s that the phenomenon of sensitive and highly sensitive humans is "biologically anchored" and that the "stimulus threshold of the thalamus" is much lower in these persons.[21] As a result, said Klages, there is a higher permeability for incoming signals from afferent nerve fibers so that they pass "unfiltered" to the cerebral cortex.[21]
The Arons (1997) recognized psychologist Albert Mehrabian's (1976, 1980, 1991) concept of filtering the "irrelevant", but wrote that the concept implied that the inability of HSPs' (Mehrabian's "low screeners") to filter out what is irrelevant would imply that what is relevant is determined from the perspective of non-HSPs ("high screeners").[13]
Boterberg et al. (2016) describe high SPS as a "temperamental or personality trait which is present in some individuals and reflects an increased sensitivity of the central nervous system and a deeper cognitive processing of physical, social and emotional stimuli."[2]
People with high SPS report having a heightened response to stimuli such as pain, caffeine, hunger, and loud noises.[5] According to Boterberg et al., these individuals are "believed to be easily overstimulated by external stimuli because they have a lower perceptual threshold and process stimuli cognitively deeper than most other people."[2] This deeper processing may result in increased reaction time as more time is spent responding to cues in the environment, and might also contribute to cautious behavior and low risk-taking.[2]
Research in evolutionary biology provides evidence that the trait of SPS can be observed, under various terms, in over 100 nonhuman species,[2][4] Aron writing that the SPS trait is meant to encompass what personality psychologists have described under various other names.[30] Conversely, Aron has distinguished SPS from what she considers it is not, explicitly distinguishing[31] high SPS from possibly similar-appearing traits or disorders (such as shyness,[16][32] sensation-seeking,[33] sensory processing disorder,[15] and autism[10]), and further, that SPS may be a basic variable that may underlie multiple other trait differences[13] (such as introversion versus extraversion[31]). Contrary to common misconception, according to Aron HSPs include both introverts and extroverts,[34] and may be simultaneously high-sensation seeking and cautious.[33]
In humans and other species, responsive and unresponsive individuals coexist and consistently display different levels of responsiveness to environmental stimuli, the different levels of responsiveness having corresponding evolutionary costs and benefits.[4] This observation parallels Aron's assertion that high SPS is not a disorder, but rather a personality trait with attendant advantages and disadvantages.[10][11] Accordingly, Aron cautions medical professionals against prescribing psychoactive medications to "cure" the trait, which may or may not coexist with an actual disorder.[35]
By 2015 the trait had been documented at various levels of study, including temperament and behavior psychology, brain function and neuronal sensitization, and genetics.[7] For example, genetic studies provide evidence that higher levels of SPS are linked to the serotonin transporter 5-HTTLPR short/short genotype,[36] polymorphisms in dopamine neurotransmitter genes,[37] and the ADRA2b norepinephrine-related gene variant.[38]
HSP Scale score patterns in adults were thought to be distributed as a dichotomous categorical variable with a break point between 10% and 35%,[15] with Aron choosing a cut-off of the highest-scoring 20% of individuals to define the HSP category.[2] A 2019 review article stated that findings suggest people fall into three sensitivity groups along a normal distribution sensitivity continuum.[1]
The term ethical implications considers the impact or consequences that psychological research has on the rights of other people in a wider context, not just the participants taking part in the research.
Sieber and Stanley (1988) used the term socially sensitive to describe studies where there are potential social consequences for the participants or the group of people represented by the research.
c01484d022