Dissociation as a Distinct Peritraumatic Coping Response: A Preliminary Analysis.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Trauma & Dissociation Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1080/15299732.2022.2117262
Natalia M Kecala, Brittany F Goodman, Michael G Griffin
{"title":"Dissociation as a Distinct Peritraumatic Coping Response: A Preliminary Analysis.","authors":"Natalia M Kecala,&nbsp;Brittany F Goodman,&nbsp;Michael G Griffin","doi":"10.1080/15299732.2022.2117262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research examining physiological responses to trauma cues in PTSD has identified a subset of \"nonresponders\" showing suppressed physiological reactivity. The defense cascade model posits that individuals respond to stressors by progressing through a series of defensive reactions, with nonresponders having advanced to a shutdown response. It remains unclear whether dissociation is at the end of a continuum of passive behavior, indicating full shutdown, or if it comprises a distinct response. The present study aimed to address this uncertainty, using EFA to compare a two-factor (active, passive) and three-factor (active, passive, dissociative) model of defensive responding. Eighty-nine female physical and sexual assault survivors reported their peritraumatic reactions within 1 month of their assault, which were entered into the EFA. The three-factor model was superior, suggesting dissociation is a distinct category of peritraumatic coping. Peritraumatic use of both passive and dissociative coping strategies were each significantly associated with ongoing use of passive coping and increased PTSD symptoms 1-month posttrauma; surprisingly, the use of passive peritraumatic coping strategies was a better indicator than peritraumatic dissociation. The inclusion of depression as a covariate removed the association of passive (but not dissociative) coping with PTSD symptom severity. Active coping use was not significantly associated with any outcome, suggesting that the presence of shutdown responses is more informative than the presence or absence of any active coping. These findings highlight the importance of differentiating peritraumatic coping responses and the need for increased attention to the comparatively neglected topic of passive coping.</p>","PeriodicalId":47476,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trauma & Dissociation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trauma & Dissociation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2022.2117262","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research examining physiological responses to trauma cues in PTSD has identified a subset of "nonresponders" showing suppressed physiological reactivity. The defense cascade model posits that individuals respond to stressors by progressing through a series of defensive reactions, with nonresponders having advanced to a shutdown response. It remains unclear whether dissociation is at the end of a continuum of passive behavior, indicating full shutdown, or if it comprises a distinct response. The present study aimed to address this uncertainty, using EFA to compare a two-factor (active, passive) and three-factor (active, passive, dissociative) model of defensive responding. Eighty-nine female physical and sexual assault survivors reported their peritraumatic reactions within 1 month of their assault, which were entered into the EFA. The three-factor model was superior, suggesting dissociation is a distinct category of peritraumatic coping. Peritraumatic use of both passive and dissociative coping strategies were each significantly associated with ongoing use of passive coping and increased PTSD symptoms 1-month posttrauma; surprisingly, the use of passive peritraumatic coping strategies was a better indicator than peritraumatic dissociation. The inclusion of depression as a covariate removed the association of passive (but not dissociative) coping with PTSD symptom severity. Active coping use was not significantly associated with any outcome, suggesting that the presence of shutdown responses is more informative than the presence or absence of any active coping. These findings highlight the importance of differentiating peritraumatic coping responses and the need for increased attention to the comparatively neglected topic of passive coping.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
分离作为一种独特的创伤周围应对反应:初步分析。
对创伤后应激障碍患者对创伤线索的生理反应的研究已经确定了一个“无反应者”的子集,显示出抑制的生理反应。防御级联模型假设个体对压力源的反应是通过一系列的防御反应来进行的,而无反应者已经发展到关闭反应。目前尚不清楚解离是否处于连续被动行为的末端,表明完全关闭,或者它是否包含一个独特的反应。本研究旨在解决这种不确定性,使用EFA来比较两因素(主动,被动)和三因素(主动,被动,分离)的防御反应模型。89名女性身体和性侵犯幸存者报告了她们在遭受性侵犯后一个月内的创伤周围反应,这些反应被录入了EFA。三因素模型更优越,提示分离是创伤周围应对的一个独特类别。创伤前后使用被动和分离应对策略均与持续使用被动应对和创伤后1个月PTSD症状增加显著相关;令人惊讶的是,使用被动创伤周围应对策略比创伤周围分离是一个更好的指标。将抑郁作为协变量排除了被动(但非分离)应对PTSD症状严重程度的关联。积极应对的使用与任何结果都没有显著相关,这表明关闭反应的存在比任何积极应对的存在或不存在更有意义。这些发现强调了区分创伤周围应对反应的重要性,以及增加对相对被忽视的被动应对话题的关注的必要性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
6.10%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Dissociative Experiences Among Transgender Women: A Phenomenological Study. A Virtual Reality Simulation to Examine the Relationship Between Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms and Decision-Making in First Responders. Can Listening to a Verbal Trauma Report Induce Intrusions? - Replication of a Randomized Trial. The Centrality of Humiliation in Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Peritraumatic Dissociation Partially Mediates the Influence of Lifetime Trauma Exposure on Prospective PTSD Symptoms.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1