Abstract
Stress is one of the most important contemporary psychological phenomena, but the significant differences among individuals in their experience of psychological pressure indicate that the intensity of stress cannot be explained solely based on the objective characteristics of events. The aim of this study is to examine hadiths that describe the mechanism underlying differences in individuals’ experiences of stress. This research was conducted using a reverse research method designed to extract the logical foundations of religious propositions; in this approach, the research begins with a hadith statement and continues until the underlying logical layer and psychological infrastructure are uncovered. The findings show that the intensity of stress experience depends on an interactive mechanism in which a set of human and cognitive–emotional factors play a role in determining the perceived weight of problems. Accordingly, a concept can be identified as a “stress scale” that determines the weight of problems. This scale introduces five main mechanisms of mental weighting as determinants of the psychological weight of problems:emotional attachment, pleasure-seeking, reference point, perceived legitimacy, and perceived being-seen. These factors, by influencing the mental appraisal system, increase or decrease the psychological weight of problems and thus the intensity of stress. The results suggest that by intervening in these five factors, the weight of stress can be reduced or increased. Furthermore, the interactive stress scale theory can provide a conceptual framework for future research in stress psychology, the design of therapeutic interventions, the enhancement of resilience, and the religious–psychological analysis of the experience of suffering

Introduction
Stress is one of the most pervasive realities of human life and a central concern of contemporary psychology. Throughout life, individuals continuously encounter events, situations, and conditions that challenge their physical, psychological, and social resources, evoking a sense of incongruity between situational demands and perceived capabilities (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). However, the remarkable variation in how different people experience stress—even when facing objectively similar events—indicates that stress intensity cannot be explained solely by the objective characteristics of events.
Historically, stress research evolved through distinct phases. Early approaches (e.g., Cannon, 1932; Selye, 1936) conceptualized stress as a physiological response to external stimuli, viewing individuals as relatively passive recipients of environmental pressures. The cognitive revolution brought a significant paradigm shift, with Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) transactional model emphasizing the role of cognitive appraisal—the process by which individuals evaluate whether events are threatening, challenging, or benign. Subsequent research identified numerous protective and vulnerability factors, including optimism, social support, self-efficacy, and meaning-making (Masten, 2018; Southwick & Charney, 2012; Park, 2010). Behavioral economics and cognitive psychology further demonstrated that humans do not evaluate life events uniformly; psychological factors play a crucial role in the intensity of experienced distress and suffering (Kahneman & Tversky; Baumeister et al., 2001).
Alongside these developments, religion and spirituality have gained recognition as important coping resources. Pargament (1997, 2013) demonstrated that religious beliefs, rituals, and orientations can facilitate psychological adaptation during crises. Studies confirm that religion contributes to stress reduction through providing meaning, hope, perceived control, emotional support, and reinterpretation of events (Nelson, 2009). Cultural psychology has also shown that psychological processes—including emotional perception and stress experience—are not universal phenomena detached from context but are shaped and given meaning within cultural systems (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Kim, Sherman, & Taylor, 2008).
In Islamic culture, concepts such as sabr (patience), tawakkul (reliance on God), riḍā (contentment), zuhd (asceticism/emotional detachment), shukr (gratitude), duʿā (supplication), taqwā (God-consciousness), and īmān (faith) have long been regarded as strategies for coping with adversity. Despite extensive research identifying multiple factors influencing stress, a coherent conceptual framework explaining how the mind assigns "psychological weight" to problems has remained absent. This theoretical gap is particularly pronounced in Islamic psychological studies. The present research addresses this gap by proposing the "interactive stress scale" model, investigating the question: What factors determine the psychological weight of events? The central idea is that stress does not arise directly from external events but from the "psychological weight" that the mind—through an interactive process—assigns to those events.

Research Methodology
This study employed the "Reverse Research" method (Pasandideh, 2019), a qualitative approach designed to extract the logical foundations and scientific implications of religious propositions. Unlike conventional methods that begin with theory and seek textual confirmation, Reverse Research starts from hadith propositions and proceeds toward uncovering their underlying logical layers and psychological infrastructures. The process consists of five stages: (1) structural extraction of components—identifying and isolating the fundamental elements within the text; (2) oppositional reversal—deriving the antithesis of each component to reveal two opposing psychological functions; (3) foundation discovery—moving beyond surface meanings to uncover underlying human systems and mechanisms (e.g., attachment systems, pleasure systems, meaning-making systems); (4) discovering relationships among foundations—examining how basic realities interconnect to reveal governing psychological laws; and (5) formalizing the foundational law—articulating discovered relationships as scientific propositions capable of explaining human experiences (Pasandideh, 2019, 2020).
For this research, texts containing the root h-w-n (هون) and its derivatives—which directly refer to the process of problems becoming light or trivialized—were selected as the analytical focus. Texts were identified using Islamic software (Jamiʿ al-Ahadith, Library of Ahl al-Bayt) and five hadiths meeting the selection criteria were subjected to the Reverse Research process, from which the final model was extracted.

Discussion
The Conceptual Foundation: The Stress Scale Model
The central contribution of this research is the conceptualization of the "Stress Scale" (tarāzu-ye stress)—an interactive psychological mechanism that mediates between objective events and the subjective experience of stress. The model distinguishes between the "size of the problem" (objective characteristics such as material loss or threat severity) and the "weight of the problem" (the psychological value the individual assigns to the event). Two individuals may face identical objective problems, yet due to differences in their psychological weighting systems, one may experience collapse while the other maintains relative calm. Stress is thus understood as a secondary phenomenon; what occurs first is assessment and weighting, with stress being merely a consequence of that evaluation.
A key theoretical feature of this model is its interactive nature. Unlike independent-weighting conceptualizations, the Stress Scale emphasizes that psychological weight is not determined in a vacuum but emerges from continuous interaction between event characteristics and a constellation of individual contextual factors (cognitive, emotional, value-based, and even spiritual). Weighting always occurs within a context of psychological investments, prior expectations, social comparisons, and the individual's relationship with the world. This explains why identical events can carry profoundly different psychological weights for different individuals.
The Five Determinants of Psychological Weighting
Through systematic analysis of Islamic texts, five primary factors were identified as determinants of psychological weighting:
Factor 1: Emotional Attachment (talluq-e ʿāṭifī). The first factor concerns the degree of emotional bonding, psychological attachment, and affective involvement an individual has toward an object, person, situation, or goal. The hadith "Whoever renounces the world, hardships become light upon him" (Man zahada fī al-dunyā hānat ʿalayhi al-muṣībāt; Kulaynī, 1429, vol. 3, p. 131) establishes this relationship. Analysis reveals that zuhd (emotional detachment) operates through reducing affective investment; when attachment is deep, psychological sensitivity to change, loss, or threat increases proportionally. This can be formulated as: Stress Intensity = Event Intensity × Degree of Emotional Attachment.
Factor 2: Pleasure-Seeking Orientation (lazzat-jūyī). The second factor concerns how pleasure is positioned within the individual's motivational structure. A hadith from Imam Zayn al-ʿĀbidīn states that "whoever turns away from desires, misfortunes become light upon him." Analysis reveals that when pleasure becomes the primary goal of life, sensitivity to frustration and deprivation increases dramatically—every obstacle becomes a serious threat. Conversely, when pleasure is positioned as a subordinate consequence within a higher-level meaning-oriented or growth-oriented framework, the same unpleasant events carry lighter psychological weight. This is formulated as: Stress Intensity = Event Intensity × Pleasure-Seeking Status.
Factor 3: Reference Point (noqṭe-ye sanjesh). The third factor concerns the internal benchmark against which individuals evaluate their current situation. The hadith "Whoever considers a misfortune great, let him remember a greater misfortune, for it will become light upon him" reveals this mechanism. Humans never experience situations absolutely; they constantly compare their current state to a "desired point" of reference. If this reference point is set very high, even relatively favorable conditions appear insufficient and frustrating. If set more realistically or lower, the same conditions can be experienced as satisfactory and tolerable. This is formulated as: Stress Intensity = Event Intensity × Type of Reference Point.
Factor 4: Righteousness/Legitimacy (ḥaqqāniyyat). The fourth factor concerns the sense of being on a right, valid, and legitimate path. The hadith "Whoever is upon clear evidence from his Lord, the hardships of the night become light upon him" reveals that when individuals face problems, they simultaneously engage an internal question: "Is this path correct? Is this suffering the result of my error, or is it part of a valid journey?" If doubt in one's righteousness arises, the problem transforms from a mere external event into a "crisis of meaning and validity"—stress intensifies because the individual experiences not only suffering but also the burden of internal invalidity. This is formulated as: Stress Intensity = Event Intensity × Degree of Righteousness.
Factor 5: Perceived Being-Seen (dīdeh shodagī). The fifth factor concerns the perception of being observed, acknowledged, and witnessed by a meaningful, aware, and supportive presence. The hadith "It became light upon me that I am in God's sight" reveals that the perception of being seen by a meaningful presence—even without changes in external circumstances—can significantly reduce stress intensity. This mechanism operates through multiple levels: the need for justice and meaning-making in suffering; the need for one's efforts to be recognized; and the need for support during crisis. When individuals feel their suffering is not ignored but witnessed and acknowledged, the psychological weight is reduced. This is formulated as: Stress Intensity = Event Intensity × Perceived Presence/Awareness.
Theoretical Convergence and Distinctiveness
The Stress Scale model shows significant convergence with established stress theories. It aligns with Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) cognitive appraisal theory in emphasizing that events are not inherently stressful but are interpreted by individuals. However, while appraisal theory primarily describes the process of threat evaluation and coping resources, the Stress Scale model seeks to explain the mechanism underlying why some appraisals carry greater psychological weight than others—and why identical appraisals can produce different outcomes for different individuals.
The model also resonates with Hobfoll's (1989) Conservation of Resources theory, which emphasizes that stress results from the threat or loss of resources individuals value. Similarly, it aligns with Blascovich and Tomaka's (1996) biopsychosocial model of arousal regulation, which highlights how individuals appraise situations as challenges or threats based on perceived resources relative to demands. The Stress Scale model extends these frameworks by proposing that the perceived value of resources, challenges, and demands is itself subject to weighting mechanisms that can be modulated through the five identified factors.
Regarding resilience research, the model suggests that a significant portion of protective factors' effects operates through modifying psychological weight. Resilience is thus not merely a personality trait or set of skills but partially a product of mechanisms that prevent events from becoming excessively heavy in the individual's mind. This perspective shifts the focus from "variables that influence stress" to the "shared mechanism" through which diverse factors operate.

Conclusion
This research addressed the fundamental question of why individuals experience different stress levels when facing similar events. By employing the Reverse Research method on Islamic textual sources, the study developed a conceptual model—the "Stress Scale"—that proposes a mediating stage between objective events and stress experience, in which the mind assigns psychological weight to events. Five factors were identified as determinants of psychological weighting: emotional attachment, pleasure-seeking orientation, reference point, righteousness, and perceived being-seen. Each factor operates through a specific mechanism to increase or decrease the psychological weight of problems.
The model's primary theoretical contribution lies in shifting the focus from "variables affecting stress" to the "shared mechanism" through which diverse factors operate. While conceptually promising, the model remains at the conceptual framework stage and requires empirical validation through instrument development, correlational and longitudinal studies, and cross-cultural examination. Future research should design instruments to measure psychological weight, test causal assumptions, and explore the model's applicability across diverse cultural and religious contexts—particularly in Islamic societies. Ultimately, the Stress Scale model suggests that what is truly consequential for human well-being is not the objective magnitude of problems but how individuals subjectively assess and weight them—opening pathways for psychological and spiritual interventions aimed at recalibrating this internal scale.