someone who had experienced both the death of a spouse and the death of a close family
member would receive the same score as someone who had recently had two holidays. It
was assumed that this score reflected an indication of their level of stress. Early research
using the SRE in this way showed some links between individuals’ SRE score and their
health status. However, this obviously crude method of measurement was later replaced
by a variety of others, including a weighting system whereby each potential life event
was weighted by a panel creating a degree of differentiation between the different life
experiences.Problems with life events theory
The use of the SRE and similar measures of life experiences have been criticized for the
following reasons.The individual’s own rating of the event is important It has been argued by many
researchers that life experiences should not be seen as either objectively stressful or
benign, but that this interpretation of the event should be left to the individual. For
example, a divorce for one individual may be regarded as extremely upsetting, whereas
for another it may be a relief from an unpleasant situation. Pilkonis et al. (1985) gave
checklists of life events to a group of subjects to complete and also interviewed them
about these experiences. They reported that a useful means of assessing the potential
impact of life events is to evaluate the individual’s own ratings of the life experience in
terms of (1) the desirability of the event (was the event regarded as positive or negative);
(2) how much control they had over the event (was the outcome of the event determined
by the individual or others); and (3) the degree of required adjustment following the
event. This methodology would enable the individual’s own evaluation of the events to
be taken into consideration.The problem of retrospective assessment Most ratings of life experiences or
life events are completed retrospectively, at the time when the individual has become ill
or has come into contact with the health profession. This has obvious implications for
understanding the causal link between life events and subsequent stress and stress-
related illnesses. For example, if an individual has developed cancer and is asked to rate
their life experiences over the last year, their present state of mind will influence their
recollection of that year. This effect may result in the individual over-reporting negative
events and under-reporting positive events if they are searching for a psychosocial cause
of their illness (‘I have developed cancer because my husband divorced me and I was
sacked at work’). Alternatively, if they are searching for a more medical cause of their
illness they may under-report negative life events (‘I developed cancer because it is a
family weakness; my lifestyle and experiences are unrelated as I have had an uneventful
year’). The relationship between self-reports of life events and causal models of illness is
an interesting area of research. Research projects could select to use this problem of
selective recall as a focus for analysis. However, this influence of an individual’s present
state of health on their retrospective ratings undermines attempts at causally relating life
events to illness onset.236 HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY