Background
The theory of challenge and threat states in athletes (TCTSA) proposes psychological antecedents will predict psychological and cardiovascular responses to stress. The present study investigated this theory in two contextually different stress tasks.
Method
78 males completed a computerised competition and a public speaking task. Cardiovascular activity was measured with impedance cardiography and a blood pressure monitor. Challenge and threat antecedents, indicators of challenge and threat and emotions were assessed pre- and post-tasks.
Results
Both tasks induced significant perturbations in cardiovascular activity and were perceived as highly challenging. Reported perceived threat was higher in the public speaking task compared to the competition task. Associations between the proposed antecedents, self-report and cardiovascular indices of challenge and threat and emotions support the TCTSA for the competition task, but less so for the public speaking task.
Conclusion
The TCTSA is supported during competitive stress, however during social stress there is dissociation between self-report appraisals and cardiovascular reactivity.

Research has highlighted the relevance of biological measures in explaining antisocial behavior, but the inclusion of such measures in clinical practice is lagging behind. According to the integrative biopsychosocial model, biological measures should be studied together with psychological and social-environmental factors. In this data-driven study, we applied this comprehensive model to explain non-violent and violent delinquency of 876 at-risk youth (715 male, 9-27 years), by combining nine biological (autonomic-nervous-system; endocrinological), nine psychological, and seven social-environmental measures. Using latent-class-regression analysis we uncovered four distinct psychologically-driven biological clusters, which differed in non-violent and violent delinquency-risk, moderated by social-environmental variables: a biological-psychopathic traits; low problem; high problem; and biological-reactive group. Individual vulnerabilities to (non-)violent delinquency depended on social-environmental context that differed between clusters. These findings highlight the importance of biological and psychological factors, in the context of social-environmental factors, in explaining (non)-violent delinquency.