4.6 Article

The combined contribution of social support and coping strategies in predicting post-traumatic growth: a longitudinal study on cancer patients

期刊

PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY
卷 20, 期 8, 页码 823-831

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pon.1782

关键词

cancer; oncology; social support; coping strategies; post-traumatic growth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The aim of this study is to investigate the role of social support and coping strategies in enhancing post-traumatic growth (PTG) in cancer patients. The study focused on both avoidance and approaching coping and on four distinct types of social support: (a) perceived availability, (b) actual received, (c) satisfaction with received support, and (d) the competence of caregiver to satisfy the patient's basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Methods: A longitudinal study was conducted with a group of 41 cancer patients currently in the treatment and management phase of their illness. Data were collected by means of a written questionnaire, at two time points (T1 and T2) that were 6 months apart. Social support was assessed using the Interpersonal Support Evaluation List and the Need Satisfaction in Relationship Scale. Coping strategies were assessed using the Brief COPE questionnaire. Social support and coping strategies were assessed only at T1. PTG was assessed using the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory at T1 and T2. Correlation and regression analyses were used to examine the association between social support and coping strategies with short-term reports of post-traumatic growth. Results: Regression analyses showed that autonomy-supportive caregivers and a problem-focused strategy of coping significantly predicted greater PTG at T2. Conclusions: This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the type of social support that may specifically aid cancer patients in experiencing PTG. Furthermore, findings confirm the important role of problem-focused coping strategies in growing psychologically. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据