Priscilla J. Hambrick-Dixon, Ph.D Hunter College of the City University of New York

From an ecological perspective, much academic research, professional and public attention has increasingly been directed toward the relationship between children's and adolescents' development and their exposure to and involvement with specific environmental conditions, both social and physical, that may engender stress reactions. Although it is known that children and adolescents are exposed to multiple potentially stressful contexts, most studies isolate the impact of particular contexts upon children and adolescents such as media, drugs, alcohol, peers, family, etc. However, these studies have shown that exposure to particular contextual influences, potential "environmental stressors", has been associated with child and adolescent physiological, behavioral, social and health outcomes that challenge and compromise their status. Environmental stress theorists argue that because many stressors do not function in isolation (Baum et al., 1993; Eckenrode & Gore, 1990) research paradigms which isolate the effects of particular stressors from their naturalistic contexts in which they occur typically may underestimate their negative impact on humans, and thus, yield invalid results (Evans, Allen, Tafalla & O'Meara, 1996).

The isolated studies, from various disciplines, conducted on the effects of exposure to particular contexts on children and adolescents lack a common theoretical framework and integration of findings necessary to further extend the present state of knowledge on how children's and adolescents' behavior and psychological functioning are impacted by exposure to multiple contextual influences. To address this concern, Hambrick-Dixon & LaPoint (1999) convened expert researchers, policy makers, practitioners whose work focuses on the relationship between children's and adolescents' development and their exposure to and involvement with specific environmental stressors. From this meeting, a common source of these potential "environmental stressors" was identified, that is, the confluence of practices in producing, manufacturing, advertising, selling and commercializing of goods, products and services-- by various businesses and corporations to consumers--particularly children and adolescents, referred to as "commercialism influences." Hambrick-Dixon & LaPoint (1999) proposed a conceptual model of multi-contextual influences on children's and adolescents' development based upon earlier and recent environmental stress theories (Lazarus, 1968; Glass & Singer, 1972 ; Cohen et al., 1981; Campbell, 1983; Evans, in press). The prevailing view of environmental stress theory is that environmental stressors present individuals with the task of adaptation and coping which may engender stress reactions, psychological and/or physiological.

The Hambrick-Dixon & LaPoint (1999) model consists of three components: sources of environmental stress, mediating variables and the effects of exposure to environmental stressors. The sources of potential environmental stress include the following: fashion, media (music, radio, internet, video games, movies, etc.), and food industries, illicit product use (drugs, alcohol, guns, etc.) and industry-by-products pollutants, etc.). The mediating variables address the question, Under what conditions and to what extent may these sources of potential environmental stress impact children' and adolescents' development. These include: the characteristics of these sources of stress (e.g., intensity, controllability, predictability, etc.), the developmental stage of the child, number of stressors to which children and adolescents are exposed, gender, sociocultural values, sociodemographic variables, level of family functioning, spirituality, social support and corporate/industry social responsibility. The effect of exposure to environmental stressors can be both behavioral, psychological and physiological. For purposes of this presentation, the Hambrick-Dixon & LaPoint (1999) model will be used to address the following questions: 1) Why is commercialism a potential environmental stressor to family life? 2) To what extent is the level of family functioning a mediating variable of the impact of commercialism on children, adolescents and their family life?

References

Baum, A., Cohen, L. & Hall, M. (1993). Control and intrusive memories as possible determinants of chronic stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55, 274-286.

Cohen, S., Evans, G. W., Krantz, D.S. & Stokols, E. & Kelly, S. (1981). Aircraft noise and children: Longitudinal and cross-sectional evidence on adaptation to noise and the effectiveness of noise abatement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 331-345,

Eckenrode, J. & Gore, S. (1990). Stress between Work & Family. New York: Plenum.

Evans, G. W. (in press), Environmental stress and health. In A.Baum, Revenson & J.E, Singer (Eds.), Handbook of health psychology. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

Evans, G.W, Allen, K.M., Tafalla, R. & O'Meara, T. (1996). Multiple stressors: Performance, psychophysiological and affective responses. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 147-154.

Glass, D.C. & Singer, J.E. (1972). Urban Stress: Experiments on noise and social stressors. New York: Academic Press.

Hambrick-Dixon, P.J. & LaPoint, V. (1999). A Model of Multi-Contextual Influences on Children's and Adolescents' Development. Paper presented at the Study Group and Invitational Scholar's Forum on Corporate/Industry Influences on Children Development, Howard University, Washington, D.C.

Lazarus, R.S. (1968). Emotions and adaptation: Conceptual and empirical relations. In W.J. Arnold (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Lincoln, N.E.: University of Nebraska Press.