Cited by 1,565Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchResilience and Mental HealthOptimism, Hope, and Well-being

Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: the role of perceived self-efficacy

Benight, Charles C., Bandura, Albert·2004·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

The present article integrates findings from diverse studies on the generalized role of perceived coping self-efficacy in recovery from different types of traumatic experiences. They include natural disasters, technological catastrophes, terrorist attacks, military combat, and sexual and criminal assaults. The various studies apply multiple controls for diverse sets of potential contributors to posttraumatic recovery. In these different multivariate analyses, perceived coping self-efficacy emerges as a focal mediator of posttraumatic recovery. Verification of its independent contribution to posttraumatic recovery across a wide range of traumas lends support to the centrality of the enabling and protective function of belief in one's capability to exercise some measure of control over traumatic adversity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2003.08.008

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Coping self-efficacy (CSE) reflects one's cognitive appraisal of their ability to manage emotions and stress.

    “On the other hand, coping self-efficacy (CSE) specifically reflects one’s cognitive appraisal of their ability to manage emotions and stress (Benight & Bandura, 2004; Chesney et al., 2006) and is considered a promising intervention mechanism mediating the impact of trauma and stress on adolescent functioning and well-being (DeCou et al., 2019; Liu & Kia-Keating, 2018; Reeves et al., 2011).”
  • The failure of typically-adaptive coping strategies when applied in a resource-limited context may promote long-term cognitive schemas that such strategies are ineffective in general, resulting in maladaptive coping in young adulthood.

    “Further, the failure of typically-adaptive coping strategies when applied in a resource-limited context may promote long-term cognitive schemas that such strategies are ineffective in general (Grey et al., 2015; Benight & Bandura, 2004), resulting in maladaptive coping in young adulthood.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Benight, C. C., & Bandura, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Colorado Springs (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Bandura, Albert
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-10
Volume
42
Issue
10
Pages
1129-1148
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170115441
Cited by
1,565
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 80 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 96 · 2023: 103 · 2022: 115 · 2021: 105 · 2020: 149 · 2019: 89 · 2018: 92 · 2017: 93 · 2016: 84 · 2015: 78 · 2014: 63 · 2013: 57 · 2012: 53
FWCI
8.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
Keywords
social cognitive theory, traumatic events, natural disasters, technological disasters, terrorist attacks, military combat, sexual assault, assault, mediation, perceived control
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Bereavement, Cognition, Combat Disorders, Disasters, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Psychological Theory, Psychology, Social, Self Concept, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Battered Women, Self Efficacy, Terrorism

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