09/05/2026
๐ง๐ผ๐ผ๐น๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ด๐๐น๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป: ๐ฅ๐ฒ๐๐ถ๐น๐ถ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฎ ๐๐๐ณ๐ณ๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ถ๐ป ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ฑ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ด๐๐น๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐น
Alcohol and substance use are just some of the behaviors that serve as a response to regulating stress in times of adversity. Due to the different stress responses of every individual when facing challenges, multiple frameworks and theories have been formulated to address and understand those behaviors reflected. However, it raises a disparity between numerous concepts due to the inconsistencies, which limits cross-study synthesis.
Many studies have focused on how resilience works, but reflect a deeper conceptual disagreement about whether resilience is a stable trait, a dynamic process, a set of protective resources, or an outcome of successful adaptation that resulted in inconsistency in structures and divergent construct definitions even among scales nominally assessing similar phenomena. Moreover, in terms of flight versus freeze, many instruments and theories in stress response processes have been created; however, many concepts and operational heterogeneity complicate the aggregation of evidence about any one response type and obscure meaningful distinctions among them. Meanwhile, resistance and strategic assimilation or appeasement remain under-theorized, especially outside of stigma or identity-based frameworks. There is no current โgold standardโ measure, and substantial gaps in validation evidence across scales.
These patterns suggest a greater need for extensive conceptual frameworks in identifying intervention targets and understanding how stress response shapes substance use trajectories in the context of adversity.
Because of these disparities, an article published in the National Library of Medicine titled โFight, Flight, Fawn, Freeze: Rethinking Substance Use Through a Stress Response Lensโ by Angel B. Algarin et al., from Arizona State University, USA, have provided a stress response framework on understanding substance use in the context of adversity by integrating fight (resistance), flight (adaptive coping), freeze (maladaptive coping), and fawn (strategic assimilation/appeasement) responses, with resilience as a moderating factor.
In recent findings, adaptive resistance and coping can protect against substance use, while maladaptive resistance, maladaptive coping, and fawning increase the chances of long-term risk despite short-term relief.
Algarin integrated both the 4Fs (Fight, Flight, Fawn, Freeze) Model, which emphasizes the acute neurobiological response without explicit attention to social context, and the Minority Stress Model, which often conceptualizes stress responses as socially embedded and dynamic processes.
Through the help of community-based interventions like the Community Wise, results showed that in substance use contexts, adaptive resistance may be expressed by individuals who, despite exposure to high-risk environments, choose not to engage in substance use. This can be seen as a form of agency that reflects a proactive stance shaped by identity, cultural values, and critical consciousness. The article also cited that while adaptive resistance can help in mitigating risks, it may also manifest maladaptive responses, which they conceptualized as reactive or dysregulated responses, such as impulsive anger, aggression, or violence, that may instead exacerbate substance use risk. Moreover, in Adaptive coping, recent evidence strengthens the protective relationship between mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal, and help-seeking: higher trait mindfulness is associated with lower prevalence of substance use disorders in adolescents, while formal help-seeking through screening and brief intervention programs shows sustained protective effects up to seven years post-intervention.
Furthermore, freeze or maladaptive coping, including denial, emotional suppression, or substance use, is consistently linked to a greater risk for substance misuse. People with limited access to mental healthcare or healthcare in general, social support, or economic stability may turn to substances as a way to self-soothe or manage overwhelming feelings. In addition, while Fawn or the strategic assimilation/appeasement may offer short-term relief or access to resources, it can result in internal dissonance, depleted self-concept, and long-term stress. Unlike resistance, which pushes back against adversity, or coping, which seeks to manage it, fawning is a compliance-based survival strategyโone that may shield individuals in the short term but ultimately reinforces the systems and narratives that sustain harm.
The article also cited that resilience is a modifier and a buffer in times of adversity by helping individuals regulate emotional and physiological responses and enhancing adaptive coping and reinforcing values-driven resistance. In vulnerable communities, especially those marginalized, collective resilience, including spiritual practices and socialization, plays a crucial role among ethnic minority youth, family-based resilience strategies that combine both emotional and social support against systemic adversity.
The authors emphasized that it is important for context-sensitive interventions to go beyond individual-level pathology and account for sociocultural and cultural environments in which stress responses are formed and deployed. In this advanced era, research on adversity and substance use requires an extensive understanding and assessment, validated measures, and greater theorization of resistance and fawning/strategic assimilation in capturing multiple stress responses and their interactions. Recognizing different factors and different responses is key to designing interventions that are empathetic, targeted, and just.
SCITECH | Christopher Kyle Saguran
LAYOUT | Jheanne Amigleo
