4 Protective Factors Lower PTSD Risk and Bolster Resilience
A new metaanalysis highlights practical approaches to overcome trauma.
PTSD (posttraumatic stress disorder) statistic vary depending on source, but while up the majority of people experience at least one traumatic event over the course of a lifetime, only a fraction develop PTSD, between 6–8%.
PTSD has many risk and protective factors. Risks include younger age, female gender, being hurt or seeing someone get hurt, having higher stress living conditions on top of the trauma, and a prior history of mental illness or substance use disorder.
Protective factors include getting support from others, positive self-appraisal in dealing with the trauma, adaptive coping strategies, having a strong system of meaning and/or faith, and biological factors. While there has been a significant amount of research on resilience and posttraumatic growth, synthesis of research is needed to confirm the highest-value targets for prevention, preparedness and intervention. Resources are scare, and trauma uses them up fast, on every level from individual to community.
Hope, Optimism and Self-Efficacy
In the Journal of Clinical Psychology (2020), authors Gallagher, Long and Phillips consolidate and analyze the existing literature on four key coping factors: hope, optimism, specific self-efficacy, and general self-efficacy.
While on first glance there is overlap, these factors are different in critical ways. Understanding those differences is important to understand what works best-and how best to use limited resources
Researchers sorted over 4500 published articles, identifying high-quality research on PTSD to include in their final metaanalysis. A metaanalysis is a research design which uses a structure approach to pool data from earlier studies in order to draw more robust conclusions than smaller studies can accomplish.
Selecting about 10 percent which met quality criteria, they looked at correlations between PTSD risk and each of the four factors. When available, they reported on “prospective” studies-where protective factors were measured before trauma happened, suggestive of a cause-and-effect relationship.
Review and Findings
1. Hope: Hope has two aspects, “ pathway thinking” and “ agency thinking”. Pathway thinking is the ability to consider various ways of reaching goals, anticipating obstacles. Agency thinking is about how strong our belief is in our drive and capacity to accomplish those goals.
They found a moderately strong effect size of -0.34, pointing to a robust relationship between greater hope and reduced PTSD. There weren’t enough prospective studies to look at pooled data, but 2 studies reviewed found a -0.22 effect size of hope on future PTSD.
2. Optimism: Optimism is a personality trait embodying one’s over-arching sense of positive expectations, the extent to which our default is to believe things will work out well. It is different from hope because it is more general, may include factors outside of oneself such as chance, with less weight on one’s own agency.
For optimism, the effect size was -0.29, reflective of a small to moderate impact on PTSD, with prospective effect of -0.20.
3. General Self-Efficacy: This is a broad belief in one’s ability to handle whatever life brings and achieve one’s goals, but does not map to specific situations.
They found a small to moderate effect size of -0.25, with a prospective effect of -0.26.
4. Specific Self-Efficacy: Specific self-efficacy is targeted to circumstances at hand, covering the belief one has in oneself to overcome a particular challenge-in this case, trauma. Unlike hope, which looks at intentions and steps, self-efficacy is about one’s faith in oneself.
Specific self-efficacy was the most robust, with effect size -0.49, suggesting a large relationship between specific self-efficacy and PTSD. The prospective effect size was also large, coming in at -0.52.
Researchers also looked at whether gender or age affected the relationship between each of the four factors and PTSD. Aside from specific self-efficacy, where data on children were not available, they found no differences after controlling for age and gender. This means that the impact of the four factors appears to hold true across different ages and genders.
Implications for Resilience
This metaanalysis consolidates and summarizes years of work across hundreds of studies, providing solid findings across a large and diverse population. While there is much more to say about resilience, posttraumatic growth, and PTSD, it clarifies differences among key overlapping factors, providing a platform for insight and action by identifying high-value targets.
Hope, optimism, general self-efficacy and specific self-efficacy are overlapping constructs, all contributing to resilience in the face of adversity, as well as during times of ease. They are not the same, varying depending on how targeted to the particular trauma or person they are, how relevant they are to planning, decision-making and action.
Optimism and general self-efficacy are important, though less direct contributors in reducing PTSD, with small to moderate impact. They support a general context of positivity, framing the situation as one which will ultimately work out well and providing one with the general sense of being able to handle difficulties, without saying why or how. They need to be in place, but alone they may not be enough to get through a serious challenge.
They are a part of resilience, and are important to train up because they are important tools for living, as well as keeping us nimble in the face of adversity. Like belief in free will, optimism and general self-efficacy help to bring forth a world where things can change, enhancing the sense of possibility, creativity, better alternatives, and cognitive flexibility.
Specific self-efficacy and hope emerged as the high-impact factors. Together, they emphasize the individual’s readiness to deal with problems, the belief in ability to respond competently, if not masterfully, in the face of great challenge, and skill in identifying and pursuing avenues to success while anticipating and evading hazards.
Individuals equipped with high self-efficacy and hope are thinking ahead and planning for contingencies, carried forward by the clear vision of desirable outcomes, empowered by having worked out the steps to get there-with contingency plans for when things go sideways.
Specific self-efficacy and hope work well because key elements are concrete and detailed, can be executed, and appraised and revised in structured ways. Likewise, self-efficacy can be cultivated via personal development work, as well as with training and psychotherapies targeted at these factors.
Self-efficacy is also supported by community-we can help each other to find the best in ourselves in any given situation by providing “esteem-support”, which focused on rewarding effort and progress, highlights abilities, provides empathy and validation, and discourages self-criticism and blame while supporting self-compassion and related concepts- gratitude for oneself and others, acceptance, forgiveness. Curiosity is a powerful place to begin.
This Blog Post (“Our Blog Post”) is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice. We will not be liable for any loss or damage caused by your reliance on information obtained through Our Blog Post. Please seek the advice of professionals, as appropriate, regarding the evaluation of any specific information, opinion, advice, or other content. We are not responsible and will not be held liable for third party comments on Our Blog Post. Any user comment on Our Blog Post that in our sole discretion restricts or inhibits any other user from using or enjoying Our Blog Post is prohibited and may be reported to Medium.com. Grant H. Brenner. All rights reserved.
Originally published at https://www.psychologytoday.com.