Cited by 46Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchCOVID-19 and Mental HealthDisaster Management and Resilience

Media Coverage, Forecasted Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms, and Psychological Responses Before and After an Approaching Hurricane

Open access
Thompson, Rebecca R., Holman, E. Alison, Silver, Roxane Cohen·2019·JAMA Network Open

Abstract

Importance: Exposure to disaster-related media coverage is associated with negative mental health outcomes. However, risk factors that render individuals vulnerable to this exposure are unknown. Hurricane-associated media exposure was expected to explain the association between forecasted posttraumatic stress (PTS) and adjustment after the hurricane. Objective: To examine forecasted PTS responses and media coverage as risk factors for negative mental health outcomes in the context of media coverage of an approaching disaster (Hurricane Irma). Design, Setting, and Participants: In a representative probability community sample of 1637 adults from Florida, respondents completed 2 online surveys: the first during the 60 hours before Hurricane Irma's landfall (wave 1; September 8-11, 2017) and the second approximately 1 month later (wave 2; October 12-29, 2017). Poststratification weights were applied to facilitate population-based inferences. Data were analyzed from October 19 through 31, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Posttraumatic stress responses, psychological distress, functional impairment, and worry about future events. Results: The wave 1 survey included 1637 participants (57.0% response rate); 1478 participants were retained at the wave 2 follow-up (90.3% retention) (weighted proportion of women, 62.2%; mean [SD] age, 59.1 [15.2] years). The final weighted sample closely approximated US Census benchmarks for the state of Florida. Data analyses using structural equation modeling revealed that exposure to media coverage of the hurricane (β = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.31; P < .001) and forecasted PTS (β = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.35-0.52; P < .001) were significantly associated with adjustment after the hurricane. In addition, a significant indirect path from forecasted PTS to adjustment after the storm occurred through exposure to hurricane-related media coverage (β = 0.07; 95% CI, 0.05-0.08; P < .001). Covariates included demographics, mental health diagnoses before the storm, perceived evacuation zone status, and degree of hurricane exposure. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study provide a more thorough understanding of how psychological factors before hurricanes are associated with adjustment after hurricanes via media consumption. The findings may also demonstrate the importance of considering prestorm psychological factors when assessing poststorm outcomes, with implications for the media and public health efforts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.6228

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a study of anticipatory media exposure to hurricanes, personally forecasted posttraumatic responses and storm-related media consumption before an approaching hurricane are important correlates of poststorm psychological adjustment.

    “In a similar way, a study of anticipatory media exposure to hurricanes found that personally forecasted posttraumatic responses and storm-related media consumption before an approaching hurricane are important correlates of poststorm psychological adjustment [148].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [33]Bollen KA, Tueller SJ, Oberski D Issues in the structural equation modeling of complex survey data. In: Proceedings of the 59th World Statistics Congress 2013. Hong Kong: International Statistical Institute; 2013.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thompson, R. R., Holman, E. A., & Silver, R. C.
Affiliations
University of California, Irvine (US)
Corresponding author
Silver, Roxane Cohen
Venue
JAMA Network Open
Published
2019-01-04
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
e186228
ISSN
2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2906852538
Cited by
46
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3
FWCI
7.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Network Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • NOAA Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
Keywords
Hurricane Irma, post-traumatic stress, psychological distress, functional disability, hurricane evacuation, disaster preparedness, mental health risk factors
MeSH terms
Disasters, Female, Florida, Forecasting, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Risk Assessment, Information Dissemination, Qualitative Research, Cyclonic Storms, Social Media

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review