Posttraumatic growth within the first three months after accidental injury in China: The role of self-disclosure, cognitive processing, and psychosocial resources
Abstract
The primary goals of this study, were to identify the posttraumatic growth (PTG) level of accidentally injured Chinese patients shortly after an accident occurred and to determine whether cognitive processing, self-disclosure, and psychosocial resources predicted PTG. A total of 232 patients were recruited from two public hospitals in Shanghai within the first three months of an accidental injury. Patients completed self-report questionnaires to assess severity of injury, cognitive processing, self-disclosure, psychosocial resources, and PTG. Patients reported a mid-low level of PTG (M = 50.38, SD = 18.12) in the short length of time post-injury. Hierarchical regression analysis indicated that subjective accident severity, deliberate rumination, perceived social support, and attitude towards disclosure were strong predictors of PTG. A moderating role of self-disclosure between intrusive rumination and PTG was identified. These findings support an interaction effect of rumination and self-disclosure on PTG and have implications for early intervention of accidentally injured patients.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
When people engage in more disclosure about traumatic experiences, they typically engage in more belief-challenging and deliberate thinking about the event.
“When people engage in more disclosure about traumatic experiences, they typically engage in more belief-challenging and deliberate thinking about the event (Dong et al., 2015).”
From Feeling pressured to talk about trauma: How pressure to disclose alters the association between trauma disclosure and posttraumatic growth (2023) · cites this paper as Dong et al., 2015
Challenging conversations and friction between viewpoints arising from low-to-moderate levels of pressure could prompt aspects of trauma processing that facilitate growth.
“Aspects of trauma processing that have been indicated to facilitate growth, such as challenging beliefs, provoking altered understandings of the world, and confronting formerly held assumptions, could all be prompted by the challenging conversations and friction between viewpoints that arise from low-to-moderate levels of pressure (e.g., Dong et al., 2015).”
From Feeling pressured to talk about trauma: How pressure to disclose alters the association between trauma disclosure and posttraumatic growth (2023) · cites this paper as Dong et al., 2015
Cites
The posttraumatic growth inventory: measuring the positive legacy of trauma
Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (1996) · Journal of Traumatic Stress · doi:10.1002/jts.2490090305 · Cited by 7,061 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Self-disclosure provides an opportunity for cognitive processing of trauma, which may facilitate PTG (Janoff-Bulman, 1992; Mancini & Bonanno, 2010; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996).”
BackgroundPositive change following trauma and adversity: A review
Linley, P. A., & Joseph, S. (2004) · Journal of Traumatic Stress · doi:10.1023/b:jots.0000014671.27856.7e · Cited by 2,260 · see citing works
A meta-analytic review of benefit finding and growth.
Helgeson, V. S., Reynolds, K. A., & Tomich, P. L. (2006) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.74.5.797 · Cited by 1,864 · see citing works
Assessing posttraumatic cognitive processes: the Event Related Rumination Inventory
Cann, A., Calhoun, L. G., Tedeschi, R. G., Triplett, K. N., Vishnevsky, T., & Lindstrom, C. M. (2011) · Anxiety, Stress, & Coping · doi:10.1080/10615806.2010.529901 · Cited by 662 · see citing works
Intrusive versus deliberate rumination in posttraumatic growth across US and Japanese samples.
Taku, K., Cann, A., Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (2009) · Anxiety, Stress, & Coping · doi:10.1080/10615800802317841 · Cited by 208 · see citing works
An experimental analogue study into the role of abstract thinking in trauma-related rumination
Ehring, T., Szeimies, A.-K., & Schaffrick, C. (2009) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2008.12.011 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kimbley, C. T., Cox, D. W., Kahn, J. H., & Renshaw, K. D. (2023) · Journal of Traumatic Stress · doi:10.1002/jts.22930 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Dong, C., Gong, S., Jiang, L., Deng, G., & Liu, X.
- Affiliations
- Second Military Medical University (CN)
- Wenzhou Medical University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Xiaohong
- Venue
- Psychology, Health & Medicine
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-05-12
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 154-164
- ISSN
- 1354-8506 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-3966
- OpenAlex
- W2079906503
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 2.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology Health & Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
- Keywords
- posttraumatic growth, unintentional injuries, self-disclosure, rumination, intrusive rumination, perceived social support, cognitive processes, psychosocial resources, injury severity, early intervention, Chinese patients
- MeSH terms
- Accidents, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Self Disclosure, Severity of Illness Index, Social Support, Thinking, Wounds and Injuries, 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
