Neurobiological stress markers in educational research: A systematic review of physiological insights in health science education

IF 3.4 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES

Trends in Neuroscience and Education Pub Date : 2024-09-24 DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2024.100242

Morris Gellisch , Martin Bablok , Beate Brand-Saberi , Thorsten Schäfer

{"title":"Neurobiological stress markers in educational research: A systematic review of physiological insights in health science education","authors":"Morris Gellisch , Martin Bablok , Beate Brand-Saberi , Thorsten Schäfer","doi":"10.1016/j.tine.2024.100242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Traditional self-reported measures in health science education often overlook the physiological processes underlying cognitive and emotional responses.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This review aims to analyze the frequency, sensitivity, and utility of physiological markers in understanding cognitive and emotional dynamics in learning environments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic PubMed search identified 156 records, with 13 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Markers analyzed included heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), cortisol, alpha-amylase, testosterone, s-IgA, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate.</div></div><div><h3>Main Findings</h3><div>HR and HRV were sensitive to educational stressors. Cortisol and alpha-amylase showed mixed results, while testosterone and s-IgA showed limited utility in directly assessing stress responses. No consistent link was found between any marker and immediate learning success.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Physiological markers in learning environments can offer valuable insights into emotional and cognitive dynamics but should not be misconstrued as direct indicators of learning outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46228,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949324000231","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Traditional self-reported measures in health science education often overlook the physiological processes underlying cognitive and emotional responses.

Purpose

This review aims to analyze the frequency, sensitivity, and utility of physiological markers in understanding cognitive and emotional dynamics in learning environments.

Methods

A systematic PubMed search identified 156 records, with 13 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Markers analyzed included heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV), cortisol, alpha-amylase, testosterone, s-IgA, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate.

Main Findings

HR and HRV were sensitive to educational stressors. Cortisol and alpha-amylase showed mixed results, while testosterone and s-IgA showed limited utility in directly assessing stress responses. No consistent link was found between any marker and immediate learning success.

Conclusion

Physiological markers in learning environments can offer valuable insights into emotional and cognitive dynamics but should not be misconstrued as direct indicators of learning outcomes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

教育研究中的神经生物学压力标记：系统回顾健康科学教育中的生理学见解

背景健康科学教育中传统的自我报告测量往往忽略了认知和情绪反应背后的生理过程。目的本综述旨在分析生理指标在了解学习环境中认知和情绪动态方面的频率、敏感性和实用性。分析的指标包括心率（HR）、心率变异性（HRV）、皮质醇、α-淀粉酶、睾酮、s-IgA、血压、血氧饱和度和呼吸频率。皮质醇和α-淀粉酶的结果参差不齐，而睾酮和s-IgA在直接评估压力反应方面的作用有限。结论学习环境中的生理指标可以为了解情绪和认知动态提供有价值的信息，但不应被误解为学习效果的直接指标。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Trends in Neuroscience and Education NEUROSCIENCES-

CiteScore

6.30

自引率

6.10%

发文量

审稿时长

65 days