感知到的创伤后生长是否能预测到当前状态和状态的创伤后生长变化?

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Clinical Psychological Science Pub Date : 2023-07-20 DOI:10.1177/21677026231182329
Meghan J. Gangel, Rowan Kemmerly, L. Wilson, Sydney Glickson, P. Frazier, H. Tennen, Eranda Jayawickreme
{"title":"感知到的创伤后生长是否能预测到当前状态和状态的创伤后生长变化?","authors":"Meghan J. Gangel, Rowan Kemmerly, L. Wilson, Sydney Glickson, P. Frazier, H. Tennen, Eranda Jayawickreme","doi":"10.1177/21677026231182329","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research on posttraumatic growth has been marred by the ubiquity of retrospective perceived growth assessments that lack construct validity. However, one justification for assessing perceived growth is that such perceptions may be a catalyst for subsequent change. We examined this question using a measurement-burst design in a representative midlife sample who had experienced a major negative life event in the past year (Wave 1: N = 804). Participants completed three waves of retrospective measures of perceived growth (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory), current-standing measures of posttraumatic growth domains, and experience-sampling assessments of state manifestations of growth-relevant domains twice a day for 3 weeks ( Nassessments = 32,099) over 6 months. In random-intercept cross-lagged panel models, perceived growth did not predict subsequent observed change in current standing or aggregated state assessments of growth. Overall, perceived growth does not appear to serve as a catalyst for positive change in the short term.","PeriodicalId":54234,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychological Science","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Perceived Posttraumatic Growth Predict Observed Changes in Current-Standing and State Posttraumatic Growth?\",\"authors\":\"Meghan J. Gangel, Rowan Kemmerly, L. Wilson, Sydney Glickson, P. Frazier, H. Tennen, Eranda Jayawickreme\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21677026231182329\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research on posttraumatic growth has been marred by the ubiquity of retrospective perceived growth assessments that lack construct validity. However, one justification for assessing perceived growth is that such perceptions may be a catalyst for subsequent change. We examined this question using a measurement-burst design in a representative midlife sample who had experienced a major negative life event in the past year (Wave 1: N = 804). Participants completed three waves of retrospective measures of perceived growth (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory), current-standing measures of posttraumatic growth domains, and experience-sampling assessments of state manifestations of growth-relevant domains twice a day for 3 weeks ( Nassessments = 32,099) over 6 months. In random-intercept cross-lagged panel models, perceived growth did not predict subsequent observed change in current standing or aggregated state assessments of growth. Overall, perceived growth does not appear to serve as a catalyst for positive change in the short term.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychological Science\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026231182329\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026231182329","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

创伤后成长的研究被普遍存在的缺乏结构效度的回顾性感知成长评估所破坏。然而,评估感知增长的一个理由是,这种感知可能是随后变化的催化剂。我们在一个有代表性的中年样本中使用测量-突发设计来检验这个问题,这些样本在过去的一年中经历了重大的负面生活事件(波1:N = 804)。参与者在6个月内完成了三波感知成长的回顾性测量(创伤后成长量表)、创伤后成长领域的现状测量和成长相关领域的状态表现的经验抽样评估,每天两次,持续3周(Nassessments = 32,099)。在随机截距交叉滞后面板模型中,感知到的增长并不能预测随后观察到的当前状况或增长汇总状态评估的变化。总体而言,预期的增长似乎不会在短期内成为积极变化的催化剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Does Perceived Posttraumatic Growth Predict Observed Changes in Current-Standing and State Posttraumatic Growth?
Research on posttraumatic growth has been marred by the ubiquity of retrospective perceived growth assessments that lack construct validity. However, one justification for assessing perceived growth is that such perceptions may be a catalyst for subsequent change. We examined this question using a measurement-burst design in a representative midlife sample who had experienced a major negative life event in the past year (Wave 1: N = 804). Participants completed three waves of retrospective measures of perceived growth (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory), current-standing measures of posttraumatic growth domains, and experience-sampling assessments of state manifestations of growth-relevant domains twice a day for 3 weeks ( Nassessments = 32,099) over 6 months. In random-intercept cross-lagged panel models, perceived growth did not predict subsequent observed change in current standing or aggregated state assessments of growth. Overall, perceived growth does not appear to serve as a catalyst for positive change in the short term.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Psychological Science
Clinical Psychological Science Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
2.10%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The Association for Psychological Science’s journal, Clinical Psychological Science, emerges from this confluence to provide readers with the best, most innovative research in clinical psychological science, giving researchers of all stripes a home for their work and a place in which to communicate with a broad audience of both clinical and other scientists.
期刊最新文献
Testing a Reward-Processing Model of Negative Urgency in Women With and Without Binge Eating Bias in the Diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder Among Sexual- and Gender-Minority Persons: Results From a Vignette-Based Experiment Opening the Black Box: The Underlying Working Mechanisms in Virtual-Reality Exposure Therapy for Anxiety Disorders A Bayesian Longitudinal Network Analysis of Panic-Disorder Symptoms and Respiratory Biomarkers Additive Benefits of Individual, Relational, and Community Factors on Physical- and Mental-Health Trajectories Among Black Americans
×
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