Unity or Anarchy? A Historical Search for the Psychological Consequences of Psychotrauma

IF 3.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
R. Jongedijk, P. Boelen, J. Knipscheer, R. Kleber
{"title":"Unity or Anarchy? A Historical Search for the Psychological Consequences of Psychotrauma","authors":"R. Jongedijk, P. Boelen, J. Knipscheer, R. Kleber","doi":"10.1177/10892680231153096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The field of traumatic stress is often referred to as being in a state of controversy and lack of continuity. Throughout history, disputes repeatedly centered on defining the psychological consequences of severe adverse events and on their causes. Even to this day this is current. To understand these controversies, an extensive historical literature review is presented of how mental consequences of trauma have been described in history, of the circumstances in which this took place, and of the disputes that have influenced the conceptualization of these mental responses. We found psychotrauma always being surrounded by controversy. Significant heterogeneity in symptom expression has been described over the centuries to this day. Some symptoms appeared steadily over many decades, but often each time period showed its own core symptoms. At syndrome level, we found an acute condition, one with longer duration, and a complex condition. Also here, definitions varied over the decades. Finally, causes have always been debated, such as biological, psychological, socio-economic, cultural, political, or legal. To better reflect the described ongoing variation in symptomatology, a more flexible diagnostic approach is proposed with a combination of both staging and subtyping that offers room for a more flexible, symptom-oriented, and personalized perspective.","PeriodicalId":48306,"journal":{"name":"Review of General Psychology","volume":"27 1","pages":"303 - 319"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680231153096","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The field of traumatic stress is often referred to as being in a state of controversy and lack of continuity. Throughout history, disputes repeatedly centered on defining the psychological consequences of severe adverse events and on their causes. Even to this day this is current. To understand these controversies, an extensive historical literature review is presented of how mental consequences of trauma have been described in history, of the circumstances in which this took place, and of the disputes that have influenced the conceptualization of these mental responses. We found psychotrauma always being surrounded by controversy. Significant heterogeneity in symptom expression has been described over the centuries to this day. Some symptoms appeared steadily over many decades, but often each time period showed its own core symptoms. At syndrome level, we found an acute condition, one with longer duration, and a complex condition. Also here, definitions varied over the decades. Finally, causes have always been debated, such as biological, psychological, socio-economic, cultural, political, or legal. To better reflect the described ongoing variation in symptomatology, a more flexible diagnostic approach is proposed with a combination of both staging and subtyping that offers room for a more flexible, symptom-oriented, and personalized perspective.
统一还是无政府?精神创伤心理后果的历史考察
创伤压力领域通常被称为处于争议状态和缺乏连续性。纵观历史,争议反复集中在定义严重不良事件的心理后果及其原因上。即使到今天,这也是最新的。为了理解这些争议,我们对历史上创伤的心理后果是如何描述的,创伤发生的环境,以及影响这些心理反应概念化的争议进行了广泛的历史文献综述。我们发现精神创伤总是充满争议。几个世纪以来,症状表达的显著异质性一直被描述到今天。一些症状在几十年中稳步出现,但往往每个时间段都表现出自己的核心症状。在综合征水平上,我们发现了一种急性情况,一种持续时间更长的情况,以及一种复杂的情况。同样在这里,几十年来的定义也各不相同。最后,原因一直存在争议,如生物学、心理学、社会经济、文化、政治或法律。为了更好地反映所描述的症状学的持续变化,提出了一种更灵活的诊断方法,结合分期和分型,为更灵活、以症状为导向和个性化的视角提供了空间。
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
Review of General Psychology
Review of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Review of General Psychology seeks to publish innovative theoretical, conceptual, or methodological articles that cross-cut the traditional subdisciplines of psychology. The journal contains articles that advance theory, evaluate and integrate research literatures, provide a new historical analysis, or discuss new methodological developments in psychology as a whole. Review of General Psychology is especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between subdisciplines in psychology as well as related fields or that focus on topics that transcend traditional subdisciplinary boundaries.
×
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