Social interactions in trauma disclosure: A multi‐informant and multiconstruct investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has established that social factors are integral to trauma recovery. Yet, there is relatively little data on the association between social interactions from different supports and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Moreover, few studies have measured these factors from multiple informants. This paper examined social interactions from different sources (i.e., negative and positive reactions from a chosen close other [CO], family/friends, and general non-COs) and their association with PTSD symptoms using multi-informant reports of the social constructs (i.e., from the individual exposed to trauma [TI] and their CO). Participants (N = 104 dyads) were recruited from an urban center within 6 months of the TIs' exposure to a traumatic event. TIs were assessed using the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale. TI self-report, t(97) = 2.58, p = .012, and CO collateral report of disapproval from family/friends, t(97) = 2.14, p = .035, and TI self-report of general disapproval, t(97) = 4.91, p < .001, emerged as significant predictors of PTSD symptoms when compared with other social constructs. Interventions that target family members' and friends' reactions to trauma survivors and societal discourse around trauma and reactions to trauma survivors are recommended. Clinical interventions that buffer against TIs' experiences of disapproval and guide COs on the provision of supportive responses are discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".