Cited by 346Religion, Spirituality, and PsychologyPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchCancer survivorship and care

The Posttraumatic Growth Inventory: A Revision Integrating Existential and Spiritual Change

Tedeschi, Richard G., Cann, Arnie, Taku, Kanako, Senol‐Durak, Emre, Calhoun, Lawrence G.·2017·Journal of Traumatic Stress

Abstract

Spiritual Change (SC) is one of 5 domains of posttraumatic growth (PTG). The current Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI) assesses this area of growth with only 2 items, one focusing on religiosity and the other focusing on spiritual understanding. The addition of 4 newly developed spiritual-existential change (SEC) items, creating an expanded PTGI (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory-X), reflects a diversity of perspectives on spiritual-existential experiences that are represented in different cultures. Samples were obtained from 3 countries: the United States (n = 250), Turkey (n = 502), and Japan (n = 314). Analyses indicated that the newly added items capture additional experiences of growth outside traditional religious concepts, yet still are correlated with the original SC items, especially in the U.S. and Turkish samples. Relationships of the PTGI-X to established predictors of PTG, event-related rumination, and core beliefs, were as predicted in all 3 countries. The new 6-item SEC factor demonstrated high internal reliability, and the 5-factor structure of the expanded scale was supported by confirmatory factor analysis. The resulting 25-item PTGI-X can be used as a validated instrument in a wide range of samples in which traditional religious beliefs are less dominant.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jts.22155

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 33 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tedeschi, R. G., Cann, A., Taku, K., Senol‐Durak, E., & Calhoun, L. G.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US)
  • Oakland University (US)
  • Department of Psychology Abant Izzet Baysal University Bolu Turkey
Corresponding author
Tedeschi, Richard G.
Venue
Journal of Traumatic Stress
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01-18
Volume
30
Issue
1
Pages
11-18
ISSN
  • 0894-9867 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6598
OpenAlex
W2576438724
Cited by
345
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 53 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4
FWCI
19.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Traumatic Stress (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
posttraumatic growth, spiritual transformation, existential change, Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, scale revision, religiosity, cross-cultural validation, rumination, core beliefs, factor structure
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Existentialism, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Japan, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Religion, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Turkey, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Spirituality, Young Adult

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