Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Article 1: Race, Gender, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in the U.S. Military: Differential Vulnerabilities?

Abstract: U.S. service women were exposed to more combat-related trauma in recent wars compared to prior conflicts and consequently faced an increased risk of trauma-related mental health outcomes. In this study, we examined gender by race differences in self-reported post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and clinician diagnoses in a large sample of U.S. Black and White service men and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, to determine whether women overall and Black women in particular are at an increased risk of PTSD compared to Black and White men. Using three PTSD measures—two symptom-based measures assessed at different times and one diagnosis measure—we found more traumatic combat exposures were associated with higher PTSD risk for service women compared to service men, but there was no additional increase in risk of PTSD for Black females.

Questions to Consider:

1. How is it possible that black women may have a different level of risk for developing PTSD in the military, but that this risk may be higher or lower than for the general population?
2. Why is it significant that the PDHA model assesses level of symptoms several months after trauma exposure?
3. What is omitted variable bias, and how does this study work to over come this bias?
    

Article 2:  Firefighters’ Psychological and Physical Outcomes After Exposure to Traumatic Stress: The Moderating Roles of Hope and Personality

Abstract: Impacts of traumatic stress on psychological and physical outcomes were investigated in a moderated mediation model. Two groups of firefighters participated. The trauma group participated in the World Trade Center search and rescue operations in New York City, and the control group, from the same organization, worked at their regular jobs. A mediation analysis indicated that both psychological and physical indicators showed significantly higher negative reactions in the trauma group, above and beyond what might be expected from reported levels of stress exposure. A moderated mediation analysis indicated that personal resources that provided a buffer to damaging outcomes for the control group might not function effectively or may even make individuals more vulnerable under traumatic stress conditions. Implications for protective actions are discussed.

Questions to Consider:

1. Why did researchers choose to measure levels of perceived stress?
2. Might the results have been different if these measures had been given to participants several months after exposure to the traumatic event?
3. How do “shattered assumptions” impact a person’s response to a traumatic event?