Disaster and Posttraumatic Adaptation: Risk and Protective Factors

Abstract

This research investigated the role of risk and protective factors in how disaster victims adapt to the impacts of the adversity. This adaptation was examined at two levels: posttraumatic distress (PTD) and posttraumatic growth (PTG). Four risk factors and five protective factors were examined. The concurrent nexted mixed methods approach with 336 sample from the population of 3rd June 2015 flood/fire disaster victims in Accra was used; 13 of which participated in both quantitative and qualitative studies. The quantitative study used standardised measures of PTG, PTSD, and general distress (using the global severity index of the symptoms checklist) as outcome variables, social support, religiosity, resilience, belief in just world, and self-efficacy (protective factors) as moderating variables, and neuroticism, assumptive world, previous traumatic history and independent self-construal (risk factors) as predictors. Five hypotheses were tested using hierarchical multiple regression and Pearson correlations. The results indicate that risk factors namely neuroticism, and previous traumatic history significantly predict PTD (general psychological distress and PTSD). It was also found that protective factors namely social support, belief in just world, resilience, and religiosity significantly predict PTG. Again, it was found that protective factors significantly moderate the relationship between risk factors and psychological distress. Finally, the quantitative study also found that social support, self-efficacy, belief in just world, resilience and religiosity are negatively and significantly correlated with PTD (psychological distress and PTSD), and there is rather a significant positive correlation between PTG and PTD. The qualitative study used the phenomenological approach with thematic analysis to answered three research questions. It was found that victims perceive the causes of the disaster to include engineering failures and anti-environmental behaviours. Their experiences include loss and biographical disruption such as disfigurement, death and loss of property, and psychological impacts such as anxiety, and mood problems. Participants’ adjustment experiences involve societal and family level interventions, spiritual support and post disaster vulnerability. It was concluded that indeed disaster victims suffer distress with risk factors exacerbating it. However, victims also experience growth following the disaster and this is facilitated by protective factors. The implications of the findings regarding clinical practice, policy, disaster management, research and theory are discussed.