4.6 Article

Effects of emotion regulation and general self-efficacy on posttraumatic growth in Chinese cancer survivors: assessing the mediating effect of positive affect

期刊

PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 4, 页码 473-478

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pon.3434

关键词

cancer survivors; posttraumatic growth; positive and negative affect; emotion regulation; general self-efficacy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31170994]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundIn recent years, there have been increasing concerns about the existence of posttraumatic growth as a result of the struggle with cancer. The present study examined several potential predictors of posttraumatic growth and the mediating role of positive affect among Chinese cancer survivors. MethodsTwo hundred thirty cancer survivors recruited from two Chinese hospitals completed self-report measures of perceived posttraumatic growth, emotion regulation, positive and negative affect, and general self-efficacy. Correlation analysis, hierarchical linear regression analysis, and Sobel test were used for data analysis. ResultsOur findings revealed that perceived level of posttraumatic growth was associated with greater positive affect, more effective emotion regulation, and higher level of general self-efficacy. No significant correlation could be found between negative affect and perceived posttraumatic growth. In addition, positive affect partially mediated the effects of expressive revealing and general self-efficacy on perceived posttraumatic growth while totally mediating the relationship between expressive suppression and perceived posttraumatic growth. ConclusionsPositive affect, expressive revealing, and general self-efficacy are important predictors of perceived posttraumatic growth among cancer survivors. Our findings also suggested that the effects of emotion regulation and general self-efficacy upon perceived posttraumatic growth may be closely related to the level of positive affect. Copyright (c) 2013 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