An unplanned test of the anxiety buffer disruption theory of posttraumatic stress symptoms

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
J. D. Elmore, James C. Hamilton, Ian M. Sherwood, Steven A. Allon
{"title":"An unplanned test of the anxiety buffer disruption theory of posttraumatic stress symptoms","authors":"J. D. Elmore, James C. Hamilton, Ian M. Sherwood, Steven A. Allon","doi":"10.1521/jscp.2024.43.2.128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Anxiety buffer disruption theory (ABDT) suggests that traumatic events lead to the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by dismantling the anxiety-buffering system outlined in terror management theory (TMT). We attempted to test ABDT using data collected from emerging adults related to their experiences in a severe tornado that struck their general geographic area. Methods: The study employed a longitudinal design. Using data collected both before and after the tornado, we tested whether (a) pre-tornado self-esteem or past trauma moderated the effect of tornado exposure on later PTSD symptoms, and (b) whether the relation between level of tornado exposure and subsequent PTSD symptoms was mediated by decreased self-esteem. Results: Consistent with ABDT, in our final analysis we found that exposure interacted with both pre-tornado self-esteem and past trauma to predict PTSD symptoms, though the moderating effect of past trauma was only marginally significant. However, none of the predicted effects was mediated through pre- to post-tornado changes in self-esteem. Discussion: This study provides partial support for ABDT by demonstrating that pre-tornado self-esteem and trauma history were risk factors for greater PTSD symptom severity among individuals who were more exposed to the tornado. However, the failed mediation effects challenge core aspects of ABDT. Despite several limitations of the study related to the timing and nature of our measurements, as well as the composition of our sample, our use of prospective data to test ABDT offers unique insight into the social-cognitive elements of PTSD.","PeriodicalId":48202,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2024.43.2.128","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Anxiety buffer disruption theory (ABDT) suggests that traumatic events lead to the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by dismantling the anxiety-buffering system outlined in terror management theory (TMT). We attempted to test ABDT using data collected from emerging adults related to their experiences in a severe tornado that struck their general geographic area. Methods: The study employed a longitudinal design. Using data collected both before and after the tornado, we tested whether (a) pre-tornado self-esteem or past trauma moderated the effect of tornado exposure on later PTSD symptoms, and (b) whether the relation between level of tornado exposure and subsequent PTSD symptoms was mediated by decreased self-esteem. Results: Consistent with ABDT, in our final analysis we found that exposure interacted with both pre-tornado self-esteem and past trauma to predict PTSD symptoms, though the moderating effect of past trauma was only marginally significant. However, none of the predicted effects was mediated through pre- to post-tornado changes in self-esteem. Discussion: This study provides partial support for ABDT by demonstrating that pre-tornado self-esteem and trauma history were risk factors for greater PTSD symptom severity among individuals who were more exposed to the tornado. However, the failed mediation effects challenge core aspects of ABDT. Despite several limitations of the study related to the timing and nature of our measurements, as well as the composition of our sample, our use of prospective data to test ABDT offers unique insight into the social-cognitive elements of PTSD.
对创伤后应激症状的焦虑缓冲干扰理论的意外测试
导言:焦虑缓冲区破坏理论(ABDT)认为,创伤事件会破坏恐怖管理理论(TMT)中概述的焦虑缓冲系统,从而导致创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的发生。我们试图利用从新成人那里收集到的有关他们在一次袭击他们所在地区的严重龙卷风中的经历的数据来检验 ABDT。研究方法:研究采用纵向设计。利用龙卷风发生前后收集的数据,我们测试了(a)龙卷风前的自尊或过去的创伤是否调节了龙卷风暴露对后来的创伤后应激障碍症状的影响,以及(b)龙卷风暴露程度与后来的创伤后应激障碍症状之间的关系是否受自尊下降的影响。结果:与 ABDT 一致,在我们的最终分析中,我们发现龙卷风暴露与龙卷风前自尊和既往创伤相互作用,从而预测创伤后应激障碍症状,尽管既往创伤的调节作用仅有轻微的显著性。然而,没有一个预测效应是通过龙卷风前到龙卷风后的自尊变化来中介的。讨论:本研究证明,龙卷风前的自尊和创伤史是导致龙卷风暴露程度较高的人群中创伤后应激障碍症状严重程度增加的风险因素,从而为 ABDT 提供了部分支持。然而,失败的中介效应对 ABDT 的核心方面提出了挑战。尽管这项研究在测量的时间和性质以及样本的组成方面存在一些局限性,但我们使用前瞻性数据来测试 ABDT,为创伤后应激障碍的社会认知因素提供了独特的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: This journal is devoted to the application of theory and research from social psychology toward the better understanding of human adaptation and adjustment, including both the alleviation of psychological problems and distress (e.g., psychopathology) and the enhancement of psychological well-being among the psychologically healthy. Topics of interest include (but are not limited to) traditionally defined psychopathology (e.g., depression), common emotional and behavioral problems in living (e.g., conflicts in close relationships), the enhancement of subjective well-being, and the processes of psychological change in everyday life (e.g., self-regulation) and professional settings (e.g., psychotherapy and counseling). Articles reporting the results of theory-driven empirical research are given priority, but theoretical articles, review articles, clinical case studies, and essays on professional issues are also welcome. Articles describing the development of new scales (personality or otherwise) or the revision of existing scales are not appropriate for this journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信