Understanding the relationship between traumatic suffering, posttraumatic growth, and prosocial variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated facets of posttraumatic growth (PTG) theory, including the nature of the index event, the relationship between suffering and PTG, and prosocial correlates of PTG. METHODS: = 253) completed measures of PTG and trauma-related, psychopathology/affect, and prosocial correlates. RESULTS: Differences emerged in PTG according to event severity, with greater PTG for those who experienced a trauma compared to a stressor. PTG was associated with nearly all trauma-related, select psychopathology/affect (e.g., anxiety, positive affect) and prosocial (e.g., empathy, volunteerism) variables. In a multivariable model, race/ethnicity, helpfulness, perceived chronicity of distress, and positive affect were associated with PTG. Curvilinear trends demonstrated that moderate chronicity of distress and current emotional distress from trauma were associated with the greatest PTG. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight factors associated with growth, including a moderately distressing trauma, positive affect, and prosocial behavior. Results clarify PTG theory and contribute to understanding conflicting evidence in prior PTG literature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".