Posttraumatic stress and posttraumatic growth and their relationship to coping and self-efficacy in Northwest Australian Cyclone communities

The main focus of disaster research conducted to date has been on providing insights into the negative consequences of experiencing a serious threat or adversity. The present study extends this research endeavour by investigating the positive post-trauma resiliency experiences of 512 survey respondents living in four cyclone prone communities in Northwest Australia. The findings reveal that disaster stress is often accompanied by disaster growth and, thus, provides an alternative resilience-based way of viewing postdisaster interventions. Stress and Growth 2 Posttraumatic Stress and Posttraumatic Growth and their relationship to coping and selfefficacy in Northwest Australian Cyclone Communities. Resilience is a stress-resistant personal quality that allows individuals to cope, adapt and thrive despite an experience of serious threat or adversity (Ahern et al., 2008). Thus, to some measure the resiliency process of struggling to ‘bounce back’ from challenge and adversity could be construed as being the very grist of the individual/community lifeexperience mill. However, in exceptional circumstances (e.g., following a natural/human initiated disaster) the ability of an individual/community to grieve, struggle, cope accept and ultimately adapt to a new high stress reality goes well beyond their pre-trauma resiliency norm. Indeed, it is this ability to fulfil post-trauma responsibilities and embrace new tasks and experiences that is considered by some to be the very essence of posttraumatic growth (PTG) (Bonanno, 2007). Three core psychological concepts have been identified within the disaster field of research, namely, stress, coping and self-efficacy, each of which have received varying levels of research attention. Of the three, stress is arguably the most widely researched concept (Ursano et al., 1994). As such, in academia instances of significant psychosocial change (either within the individual or the affected community) are termed stressor events (Van Ameringen et al., 2008). In addition, much research endeavour has been devoted to understanding the human response to post-disaster stressor events within specific age cohorts (e.g., Adult responses see Norris et al., 2008; adolescent responses see Pina et al., 2008; and child responses see Kar, 2009). Consistently, the findings from these studies have suggested that the elderly, adolescents, and children are the most susceptible age groups for developing a high stress response following an experience of an intense stressor (disaster) event (Norris et al., 2008). Stress and Growth 3 Other sections of academia have focused on understanding the human stress response to post-disaster stressor events within specific groups of adult workers who were either directly or non-directly involved with the disaster. Somewhat predictably individual workers (e.g., response volunteers [Armstrong et al., 1995]; emergency workers [Wagner, McFee, & Martin, 2009]; nurses and medical workers [Freedy et al., 1992]; emergency managers [Paton & Flin, 1999]) and the general public who were directly impacted by the disaster were consistently reported as having the greatest post-trauma stress response when compared to their equivalent indirectly involved worker/member of the public (Adams & Boscarino, 2005). Therefore, the directness of an individual’s involvement in a disaster event has been hypothesized to be a key predictor of a posttraumatic stress (PTS) response. Other researchers still have examined the range of short and long term post-trauma stress responses that humans typically present with following an experience of a disaster event. In this regard, their findings have consistently reported that in the short term individuals experiencing a traumatic event typically manifest signs of demoralization, discontentment, disconnectedness, grief, irritability, fatigue, and loss of concentration (Neria, et al, 2007) while, in the longer term, they typically display aggression, anxiety, delayed onset post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and psychic numbing (Andrews et al., 2007). The second psychological concept within the field of disaster research to receive considerable research attention is the human coping mechanism. In particular, the research has focused on understanding the types of coping strategies individuals adopt in disaster situations. The consensus being that people generally manifest three distinct types of coping, namely, avoidance coping (i.e., they avoid the issue), emotion coping (i.e., they focus on their emotions), or task-focused coping (i.e., they focus on the task in hand to be solved). Even though the bulk of the coping research relates to adults (e.g., Bachrach & Zautra, 1985; Stress and Growth 4 Holaday et al., 1995; Pearlin & Schooler, 1978), the smaller body of coping research relating to adolescents and children (Ronan & Johnston, 1999), seems to suggest that the younger the person is at the time of their experience of a disaster event, then the more likely they are to utilize a negative avoidance coping mechanism (Bolin & Stanford, 1998). The third psychological concept within the field of disaster research, self-efficacy, has tended to receive far less research attention. This has occured despite Bandura’s (2002) hypothesis that self-efficacy is of critical importance to the adaptation and change processes and, therefore, is a crucial component of posttraumatic growth. Indeed, Bandura (1977) has long maintained self-efficacy to be the mediator between knowledge and action, and, furthermore has described self-efficacy as being “people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances” (Bandura, 1986, p. 391). Further to this Bandura (1995) argues that the development of self efficacy can be understood through mastery. Thus, self-efficacy is thought to tap into a person’s appraisal of their ability to act in a given situation regardless of their own skill repertoire (Bachrach & Zautra, 1985; Rutter, 1985). Moreover, self-efficacy is regarded as being an important moderating and protective motivational construct in disaster situations (Gist & Mitchell, 1992) as it facilitates coping and provides individuals with a sense of control at a time when their control is often at its lowest ebb (Benight & Bandura, 2004). While much of the disaster research conducted to date has focussed primarily on providing insights into the negative consequences of experiencing a serious threat or adversity, Cordova, and colleagues (2001) have argued a need for more specific research to examine the positive post-trauma experiences which sometime occur following a disaster experience. They suggest such research will provide a far fuller picture of what is actually taking place. Support for this contention can be derived from a number of other disasterrelated studies that in the course of reporting their findings have noted positive post-trauma Stress and Growth 5 experiences in their respective researchcohorts (e.g., women suffering from AIDS see Dunbar et al., 1998; survivors of a ferry disaster see Stephen et al., 1994; combat forces in Vietnam see Fontana & Rosenheck, 1998; and sexual assault survivor see Frazier et al., 2001). These types of positive experiences are, as already alluded to, the very essence of PTG (McMillen, 1999; Park et al., 1996). PTG is grounded in existential theory (i.e., the re-evaluation of one’s life) and is considered by some to be the antithesis of PTS (Cordova et al., 2001; Tedeschi et al., 1998). In one of the most comprehensive models of PTG developed it has been determined that there are 5 dimensions that constitute PTG, these being relating to others; new possibilities; personal strength; spiritual change; and, appreciation of life (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996; Morris, Shakespeare-Finch, Rieck, & Newbury, 2005). Indeed, PTG has been defined as being a significant and beneficial post-trauma change in the affected individual’s cognitive and emotional life that are largely built upon the interrelated constructs of fortitude, hardiness, and self-efficacy (Almedom, 2005). Given the small but growing research in the PTG resiliency area (Almedom, 2005) the present study has endeavoured to extend the existing knowledge base by reporting on the disaster related stress and PTG experiences of individuals living in Northwest Australian communities who have previously experienced, and continue to live under, threat of seasonal cyclones. Specifically it examines: (1) What are the relationships between individuals’ (coping, self efficacy) and disaster experience (stress, growth) variables? (2) What is the best predictor of PTS? (3) What is the best predictor of PTG? (4) What variables differentiate high and low stress groups? Finally, (5) Which variables differentiate high and