# Suicidal Distress and Daily Well-Being: A New Model of Social Hysteresis

**Authors:** Enrique Fernández-Vilas, Juan José Labora González, Juan R. Coca

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/bs16020215 · Behavioral Sciences · 2026-02-03

## TL;DR

The paper introduces a new model called social hysteresis to explain how similar social stress can lead to different outcomes in well-being and suicidal distress.

## Contribution

It combines practice theory with stress research to propose a novel framework explaining persistent distress despite improved conditions.

## Key findings

- Social hysteresis explains divergent outcomes through anomic and radicalising regimes.
- The model suggests persistence in distress due to multistability and asymmetric thresholds.
- It offers testable expectations for panel and experience-sampling studies.

## Abstract

Social acceleration and recurrent structural shocks increase habitus–field mismatch, yet similar exposure does not produce uniform trajectories of daily well-being or suicidal distress. This paper asks how comparable structural strain can generate divergent, path-dependent outcomes and why suicidal vulnerability may persist after objective conditions improve. We develop a theory-building, concept-driven framework that integrates Bourdieu’s practice theory with social and behavioural scholarship on stress, anomie, and despair, and conceptualises these dynamics as social hysteresis. The regime-based model specifies two ideal-typical response orientations through which mismatch can stabilise: an anomic regime marked by shame, withdrawal, and inwardly directed harm, and a radicalising regime marked by grievance framing, moral indignation, and organised participation, without implying violent extremism. Represented through hysteresis loops, the framework implies multistability, asymmetric switching thresholds, and scarring, providing a mechanism for persistence and non-linearity in distress trajectories. The model derives testable expectations for longitudinal panel and experience-sampling designs and suggests that prevention and intervention design should combine reductions in mismatch with relational and institutional infrastructures that facilitate regime shifts and reopen the space of possibles.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** violent (MESH:D001523), anxiety (MESH:D001007), Mental-health (OMIM:603663), sleep disruption (MESH:D019958), shock (MESH:D012769), injury to (MESH:D014947), suffering (MESH:D010146), sleep (MESH:D012893), Suicidal Distress (MESH:D012128), depression (MESH:D003866), suicidal ideation (MESH:D001072), self-harm (MESH:D012652)
- **Chemicals:** Doxa (-)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12938182/full.md

## Figures

2 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12938182/full.md

## References

38 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12938182/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12938182