“It Has Informed My Entire Life”: Event Centrality, Vicarious Traumatization, and Vicarious Post-Traumatic Growth in Loved Ones Indirectly Exposed to Interpersonal Trauma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
It is well-known that interpersonal traumatic events can impact the physical and mental health of those indirectly exposed to the events. Less studied are populations of loved ones who have been indirectly exposed to interpersonal trauma. My dissertation first aimed to synthesize the literature related to vicarious traumatization (VT), vicarious posttraumatic growth (VPTG), and event centrality in loved ones indirectly exposed to interpersonal trauma through a scoping review. The Joanna Briggs Institute methodology was used for Study 1. Inclusion criteria included (a) participants were indirectly exposed to the interpersonal trauma of a loved one in adulthood, (b) discussion of VT, VPTG, event centrality, or related terms, (c) published peer-reviewed empirical journal articles, and (d) available in English. We used a three-step search strategy to find relevant articles. Keywords found from the first two steps were entered into PsychINFO, PsycArticles, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Reference lists of the included articles were also examined. The identified articles were then screened using the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Twenty-eight articles met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Twenty-six articles referenced VT or related terms, one referenced VPTG, and one referenced vicarious trauma keywords. No articles referenced event centrality. The results of this study led to the second aim for this dissertation: to understand parents' process of vicarious event centrality for their child's interpersonal traumatic event post-disclosure, as this was a knowledge gap in the literature. Participants in Study 2 were 17 primary caregivers (14 maternal caregivers, 3 paternal caregivers) of 27 victims of child interpersonal trauma (14 males, 13 females) located in Canada. The age of participants ranged from 35 to 75 years (average = 54.5 years) and majority self-identified as Caucasian (70.6%). Grounded theory (GT) was used to analyze the data collected from participant interviews. The resulting model was labelled Vicarious Event Centralization and Decentralization, indicating that parents center their child’s interpersonal trauma across many areas of their lives, which orients them to focus on protecting and healing the child. After the child’s functioning improves, parents are then able to reorient to life beyond the trauma, representing decentralization. The GT consists of three phases, Centralization, Decentralization Gateway, and Decentralization. These results illustrate that parents’ centralization of the trauma may be an adaptive mechanism that promotes child recovery, which in turn allows parents to begin to decentralize the trauma and move towards recovery. This series of studies supports that loved ones are affected by indirect interpersonal trauma exposure in a myriad of ways and require unique services to address their needs. These studies can help practitioners understand the post-trauma experience for loved ones and target areas likely to increase recovery.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».