Cognitive processing of trauma as a predictor of the negative and positiveconsequences of experienced traumatic events

IF 0.7 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Z. Juczyński, N. Ogińska-Bulik
{"title":"Cognitive processing of trauma as a predictor of the negative and positiveconsequences of experienced traumatic events","authors":"Z. Juczyński, N. Ogińska-Bulik","doi":"10.5114/ppn.2018.80884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The cognitive processing of trauma, expressed in the form of coping strategies, aims to help individuals adapt to the new reality that emerges following an experience of trauma. The research presented here is focused on determining the role of cognitive strategies of coping with trauma and the occurrence of consequences both negative, in the form of posttraumatic stress disorders (PTSD), and positive, in the form of posttraumatic growth (PTG). Methods: A total of 340 people who experienced various traumatic events (female victims of domestic violence, victims of road accidents, parents of children with cancer, parents of physically disabled children, men with paraplegia and paramedics) were examined. The research involved the use of several standardized measurement tools, including the Cognitive Processing of Trauma Scale (CPOTS), PTSD Check List for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI). Results: Negative strategies (denial, regret) were positively related to PTSD, and negative to PTG, while positive strategies (positive cognitive restructuring, resolution acceptance, downward comparison) inversely, positively with PTG and negatively with PTSD. The strategy of regret proved to be the best predictor of PTSD, while the strategies of resolution/acceptance – the best predictor of PTG. The role of cognitive coping strategies with trauma varies depending on the type of experienced events. Conclusions: The cognitive processing of trauma plays an important role in the occurrence of negative and positive consequences of experienced events. The obtained results may have important practical implications, especially in the therapy of people exposed to trauma.","PeriodicalId":39142,"journal":{"name":"Postepy Psychiatrii i Neurologii","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5114/ppn.2018.80884","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postepy Psychiatrii i Neurologii","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/ppn.2018.80884","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Purpose: The cognitive processing of trauma, expressed in the form of coping strategies, aims to help individuals adapt to the new reality that emerges following an experience of trauma. The research presented here is focused on determining the role of cognitive strategies of coping with trauma and the occurrence of consequences both negative, in the form of posttraumatic stress disorders (PTSD), and positive, in the form of posttraumatic growth (PTG). Methods: A total of 340 people who experienced various traumatic events (female victims of domestic violence, victims of road accidents, parents of children with cancer, parents of physically disabled children, men with paraplegia and paramedics) were examined. The research involved the use of several standardized measurement tools, including the Cognitive Processing of Trauma Scale (CPOTS), PTSD Check List for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI). Results: Negative strategies (denial, regret) were positively related to PTSD, and negative to PTG, while positive strategies (positive cognitive restructuring, resolution acceptance, downward comparison) inversely, positively with PTG and negatively with PTSD. The strategy of regret proved to be the best predictor of PTSD, while the strategies of resolution/acceptance – the best predictor of PTG. The role of cognitive coping strategies with trauma varies depending on the type of experienced events. Conclusions: The cognitive processing of trauma plays an important role in the occurrence of negative and positive consequences of experienced events. The obtained results may have important practical implications, especially in the therapy of people exposed to trauma.
创伤的认知加工作为经历创伤事件的消极和积极后果的预测因子
目的:创伤的认知加工以应对策略的形式表现出来,旨在帮助个体适应创伤经历后出现的新现实。本研究的重点是确定应对创伤的认知策略的作用,以及创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的消极形式和创伤后成长(PTG)的积极形式的后果。方法:对340名经历过各种创伤事件的人(女性家庭暴力受害者、道路交通事故受害者、癌症儿童的父母、肢体残疾儿童的父母、截瘫男性和护理人员)进行调查。本研究使用了几种标准化的测量工具,包括创伤认知加工量表(CPOTS)、DSM-5 PTSD检查表(PCL-5)、事件影响量表(IES-R)和创伤后成长量表(PTGI)。结果:消极策略(否认、后悔)与PTSD呈正相关,与PTG呈负相关;积极策略(积极认知重构、决心接受、向下比较)与PTG呈负相关,与PTSD呈负相关。后悔策略是PTSD的最佳预测因子,而解决/接受策略是PTG的最佳预测因子。认知应对策略在创伤中的作用取决于所经历事件的类型。结论:创伤的认知加工在经历事件的消极和积极后果的发生中起着重要作用。所获得的结果可能具有重要的实际意义,特别是在治疗暴露于创伤的人。
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
Postepy Psychiatrii i Neurologii
Postepy Psychiatrii i Neurologii Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The quarterly Advances in Psychiatry and Neurology is aimed at psychiatrists, neurologists as well as scientists working in related areas of basic and clinical research, psychology, social sciences and humanities. The journal publishes original papers, review articles, case reports, and - at the initiative of the Editorial Board – reflections or experiences on currently vivid theoretical and practical questions or controversies. Articles submitted to the journal are evaluated first by the Section Editors, specialists in the fields of psychiatry, clinical psychology, science of the brain and mind and neurology, and reviewed by acknowledged authorities in the respective field. Authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other.
×
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