"I Cannot Tell Anyone:" There are Many Reasons.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1080/15299732.2024.2383183
Paula Thomson, S Victoria Jaque
{"title":"\"I Cannot Tell Anyone:\" There are Many Reasons.","authors":"Paula Thomson, S Victoria Jaque","doi":"10.1080/15299732.2024.2383183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Purpose</i>: The purpose of this study was to investigate variables associated with difficulty disclosing past trauma. Across several prevalence studies, 26% of adults never disclosed childhood abuse until adulthood when they were asked in a research survey or interview question. In this Institutional Review Board approved study, group differences were examined (ability and inability to disclose a traumatic event) as well as predictors for difficulty disclosing past trauma. <i>Method</i>: A non-clinical population (<i>N</i> = 693) was examined to determine prevalence rates and group differences between participants unable to tell someone about a past traumatic event (10%) compared to those who could disclose past traumatic events (90%). Variables included pathological dissociative processing, internalized shame, coping strategies (task, emotion, avoidance), and cumulative trauma exposure. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine predicting variables for disclosure difficulties. <i>Findings</i>: The group that had difficulty disclosing a past traumatic event had more cumulative trauma, pathological dissociative processing, emotion-oriented coping, and shame. In the first logistic regression analyses, interpersonal traumatic events were predictors for the inability to disclose a traumatic event (classified 90% of group membership). In the second logistic regression, shame and cumulative traumatic exposure were predicting factors (classified 90% of group membership). <i>Conclusion</i>: Difficulty speaking about a traumatic event was associated with interpersonal adult and childhood traumatic events, more internalized shame, and cumulative trauma exposure. It is recommended that clinicians working with patients with substantial traumatic exposure address shame, pathological dissociative processing, and emotion-oriented coping strategies if they detect trauma disclosure difficulties.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2024.2383183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate variables associated with difficulty disclosing past trauma. Across several prevalence studies, 26% of adults never disclosed childhood abuse until adulthood when they were asked in a research survey or interview question. In this Institutional Review Board approved study, group differences were examined (ability and inability to disclose a traumatic event) as well as predictors for difficulty disclosing past trauma. Method: A non-clinical population (N = 693) was examined to determine prevalence rates and group differences between participants unable to tell someone about a past traumatic event (10%) compared to those who could disclose past traumatic events (90%). Variables included pathological dissociative processing, internalized shame, coping strategies (task, emotion, avoidance), and cumulative trauma exposure. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine predicting variables for disclosure difficulties. Findings: The group that had difficulty disclosing a past traumatic event had more cumulative trauma, pathological dissociative processing, emotion-oriented coping, and shame. In the first logistic regression analyses, interpersonal traumatic events were predictors for the inability to disclose a traumatic event (classified 90% of group membership). In the second logistic regression, shame and cumulative traumatic exposure were predicting factors (classified 90% of group membership). Conclusion: Difficulty speaking about a traumatic event was associated with interpersonal adult and childhood traumatic events, more internalized shame, and cumulative trauma exposure. It is recommended that clinicians working with patients with substantial traumatic exposure address shame, pathological dissociative processing, and emotion-oriented coping strategies if they detect trauma disclosure difficulties.

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
"我不能告诉任何人:"原因有很多。
目的:本研究旨在调查与难以披露过去创伤有关的变量。在几项流行病学研究中,有 26% 的成年人直到成年后才在研究调查或访谈问题中披露过童年受虐待的经历。在这项获得机构审查委员会批准的研究中,研究人员考察了群体差异(披露创伤事件的能力和无能)以及难以披露过去创伤的预测因素。研究方法研究了非临床人群(N = 693),以确定无法向他人透露过去创伤事件的参与者(10%)与能够透露过去创伤事件的参与者(90%)之间的患病率和群体差异。变量包括病理性分离处理、内化羞耻感、应对策略(任务、情绪、回避)和累积创伤暴露。我们进行了逻辑回归分析,以确定披露困难的预测变量。研究结果难以披露过去创伤事件的群体有更多的累积性创伤、病理性分离处理、情绪导向型应对和羞耻感。在第一项逻辑回归分析中,人际创伤事件是无法披露创伤事件的预测因素(90%的小组成员被归类)。在第二次逻辑回归中,羞耻感和累积性创伤暴露是预测因素(90%的组员被归类)。结论难以启齿创伤事件与成人和童年人际创伤事件、更多的内化羞耻感和累积创伤暴露有关。建议临床医生在与有大量创伤暴露的患者合作时,如果发现他们有披露创伤的困难,应解决羞耻感、病理性分离处理和情绪导向型应对策略等问题。
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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
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