{"title":"统一还是无政府?精神创伤心理后果的历史考察","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":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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}","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}
Unity or Anarchy? A Historical Search for the Psychological Consequences of Psychotrauma
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.
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.