Attachment and compassion fatigue among American and Israeli mental health clinicians working with traumatized victims of terrorism.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the construct of compassion fatigue with the role of attachment as a potential mediator among mental health clinicians working with victims of terrorism in the New York metropolitan region of the United States and Israel. Differences between clinicians practicing within Israel (n = 31) and New York (n = 35), in terms of their symptoms of compassion fatigue, compassion satisfaction, and "burnout," were not significant, as measured by multivariate analyses of variance. Based upon nonsignificant differences, mediational statistical tests could not be run; thus, mediation did not hold. The data failed to support a significant difference between compassion fatigue and attachment avoidance or anxiety. However, data collection resulted in attenuated scores for compassion fatigue and compassion satisfaction within both study groups of clinicians and moderate to average scores for burnout. Israeli clinicians had significantly more avoidant attachment dimensions than their New York cohorts. The strongest predictors of compassion satisfaction were (a) low attachment anxiety and (b) sufficient clinical experience related to treating victims of trauma. The strongest predictors of burnout were (a) minimal clinical experience, (b) minimal experience working with trauma victims, and (c) greater avoidant attachment dimensions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".