Silvia Koller
Postgraduate Program in Psychology
Institute of Human Sciences and Information
Federal University of Rio Grande (FURG)
Institute of Psychology
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Brazil
North West University, África do Sul
Silvia Koller
Postgraduate Program in Psychology
Institute of Human Sciences and Information
Federal University of Rio Grande (FURG)
Institute of Psychology
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Brazil
North West University, África do Sul
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2026 | n°5 | By analyzing the role of coping with violent contexts and its interaction with cortisol levels, a study shows that it is not only the environment that matters, but how each person deals with difficulties
IMAGE: ADOBESTOCK
We know that living in environments where violence is common leaves deep scars on people. It’s not just a feeling of insecurity or constant fear: the body also reacts, often without us realizing it. A study led by researcher Bria Gresham, from the Institute of Child Development at the University of Minnesota, in the United States, delves precisely into this issue: how exposure to community violence can affect the functioning of our stress axis, the famous HPA axis (hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal), responsible for the release of cortisol (a fundamental hormone in the body’s response to stress, which helps to mobilize energy, regulate blood pressure and prepare the body to deal with challenges). The research goes further: can certain ways of dealing with problems protect against — or worsen — this impact?
Gresham and colleagues started from the principle that the literature already suggested: living in violent contexts can “get under the skin,” that is, affect the way the body reacts to stress. But little is still known about protective factors that could reduce or damage these negative effects. This is where the researchers’ focus comes in: understanding whether the different strategies people use to cope with stressful situations, especially avoidance strategies, can modify the relationship between living in violent environments and reacting physiologically to stressful situations.
We know that living in environments where violence is common leaves deep scars on people. It’s not just a feeling of insecurity or constant fear: the body also reacts, often without us realizing it. A study led by researcher Bria Gresham, from the Institute of Child Development at the University of Minnesota, in the United States, delves precisely into this issue: how exposure to community violence can affect the functioning of our stress axis, the famous HPA axis (hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal), responsible for the release of cortisol (a fundamental hormone in the body’s response to stress, which helps to mobilize energy, regulate blood pressure and prepare the body to deal with challenges). The research goes further: can certain ways of dealing with problems protect against — or worsen — this impact?
Gresham and colleagues started from the principle that the literature already suggested: living in violent contexts can “get under the skin,” that is, affect the way the body reacts to stress. But little is still known about protective factors that could reduce or damage these negative effects. This is where the researchers’ focus comes in: understanding whether the different strategies people use to cope with stressful situations, especially avoidance strategies, can modify the relationship between living in violent environments and reacting physiologically to stressful situations.
Social Stress
The study authors recruited 148 young adults, all first-generation college students, aged 18 to 25, spread across the United States. These young people answered questionnaires about personal characteristics, how much they were exposed to violence in their communities, and what strategies they usually used to cope with difficult and stressful situations. After that, they all underwent an online version of a classic stress induction test: the Trier Social Stress Test Online (TSST-OL).
Basically, it is a structured situation that generates social stress — commonly involving public speaking or presenting to evaluators, contexts that usually leave anyone in a state of tension. The study did not expose anyone to violence during the experiment; violence was measured only by participants’ previous reports of their life experiences. Participants’ cortisol levels were measured throughout this process using saliva samples, a method widely used in psychobiological research because it is reliable and minimally invasive. Participants collected saliva following standardized instructions, at different times during the online stress test.
The data analysis was performed using multilevel modeling, a statistical technique that allows tracking how cortisol changes over time in each person, while also comparing these trajectories among different participants. This type of analysis considers, for example, that everyone has their own pace for reaching peak cortisol levels during stress.
The main objective was to verify whether there was a direct relationship between exposure to community violence and cortisol reactivity, and whether the different strategies moderated this relationship.
Unexpected Results
The results were unexpected—and, in part, surprising even to the researchers themselves.
First, they did not find a direct association between living in violent environments and cortisol reactivity. That is, simply having been exposed to violence throughout life did not mean that young people would exhibit more intense physiological responses to social stress. The study focused only on cortisol; other physiological responses, such as heart rate, were not measured.
But here comes the central point of the study. When the researchers analyzed the interaction between exposure to violence and avoidance strategies, a very relevant result appeared. Young people who reported greater exposure to community violence and who more frequently used avoidance strategies—such as running away from the problem, not thinking about it, or avoiding difficult feelings—showed much stronger cortisol responses to the social stress situation. In other words, the greater the violence experienced and the greater the use of avoidance, the more intense the body’s reaction.
For those with medium or high levels of avoidant coping, violence was clearly associated with a more pronounced increase in cortisol levels during the test. Among those who reported little use of this type of coping mechanism, violence made no difference: there was no significant increase in the physiological stress response.
Impact of Violence
The avoidant coping therefore seems to function as a true amplifier of the impact of violence on the physiological health of these young people. Instead of protecting, avoiding thinking or talking about violent experiences can make the body even more sensitive to stress, especially in situations of social evaluation — something very common in academic and professional life.
Even though it is an exploratory study, the message is clear: it is not only the violent environment that matters, but also how each person learns — or is led — to deal with adversity. The results suggest that more active coping strategies, such as talking about difficult experiences, seeking support, and learning to regulate emotions, can be important ways to reduce the effects of violence on the body.
This reinforces the need to consider educational and psychosocial interventions, including in contexts such as the classroom, that help young people exposed to violence develop healthier ways of dealing with stress in their daily lives.
More active strategies for dealing with these situations — such as talking about difficult experiences, seeking support, reflecting on emotions, and learning ways of emotional regulation — can help reduce the physiological impact of stress. In educational contexts, this reinforces the importance of spaces for dialogue, socio-emotional education, and practices that help young people name, understand, and cope with adversity in a healthier way.
Understanding the problem is a crucial first step—now, the challenge is to transform this knowledge into care and concrete action for those living in contexts of such adversity.
Impact of Violence
The avoidant coping therefore seems to function as a true amplifier of the impact of violence on the physiological health of these young people. Instead of protecting, avoiding thinking or talking about violent experiences can make the body even more sensitive to stress, especially in situations of social evaluation — something very common in academic and professional life.
Even though it is an exploratory study, the message is clear: it is not only the violent environment that matters, but also how each person learns — or is led — to deal with adversity. The results suggest that more active coping strategies, such as talking about difficult experiences, seeking support, and learning to regulate emotions, can be important ways to reduce the effects of violence on the body.
This reinforces the need to consider educational and psychosocial interventions, including in contexts such as the classroom, that help young people exposed to violence develop healthier ways of dealing with stress in their daily lives.
More active strategies for dealing with these situations — such as talking about difficult experiences, seeking support, reflecting on emotions, and learning ways of emotional regulation — can help reduce the physiological impact of stress. In educational contexts, this reinforces the importance of spaces for dialogue, socio-emotional education, and practices that help young people name, understand, and cope with adversity in a healthier way.
Understanding the problem is a crucial first step—now, the challenge is to transform this knowledge into care and concrete action for those living in contexts of such adversity.
