This thesis focus on threats as an experience of stress. Threats are distinguished from challenges and hindrances as another dimension of stress in challenge-hindrance models (CHM) of work stress (Tuckey et al., 2015). Multiple disciplines of psychology (e.g. stereotype, Fingerhut & Abdou, 2017; identity, Petriglieri, 2011) provide a variety of possible events that can trigger threats (e.g., failure expe-riences, social devaluation; Leary et al., 2009). However, systematic consideration of triggers and thus, an overview of when does the danger of threats arises, has been lacking to date. The explanation why events are appraised as threats is related to frustrated needs (e.g., Quested et al., 2011; Semmer et al., 2007), but empirical evidence is rare and needs can cover a wide range of content (e.g., relatedness, competence, power), depending on need approaches (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 2000; McClelland, 1961). This thesis aims to shed light on triggers (when) and the need-based mechanism (why) of threats. In the introduction, I introduce threats as a dimension of stress experience (cf. Tuckey et al., 2015) and give insights into the diverse field of threat triggers (the when of threats). Further, I explain threats in terms of a frustrated need for positive self-view, before presenting specific needs as possible deter-minants in the threat mechanism (the why of threats). Study 1 represents a literature review based on 122 papers from interdisciplinary threat research and provides a classification of five triggers and five needs identified in explanations and operationalizations of threats. In Study 2, the five triggers and needs are ecologically validated in interviews with police officers (n = 20), paramedics (n = 10), teach-ers (n = 10), and employees of the German federal employment agency (n = 8). The mediating role of needs in the relationship between triggers and threats is confirmed in a correlative survey design (N = 101 Leaders working part-time, Study 3) and in a controlled laboratory experiment (N = 60 two-person student teams, Study 4). The thesis ends with a general discussion of the results of the four studies, providing theoretical and practical implications.