4.2 Review

Critical considerations for the positive memory-posttraumatic stress disorder model

期刊

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY & PSYCHOTHERAPY
卷 29, 期 1, 页码 81-91

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cpp.2599

关键词

affective processes; cognitive processes; positive memories; posttraumatic stress disorder; trauma

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [K23DA039327, P20GM125507]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study focuses on a Positive Memory-PTSD model, which highlights the importance of specific positive memories, the heterogeneity in affect processes following positive memory retrieval, and the potential moderating effects of trauma type/count and co-occurring conditions on the relationship between positive memory processing and PTSD. This updated model provides implications for positive memory interventions for individuals with PTSD symptoms.
Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) includes changes in processes such as encoding and retrieval for both traumatic and positive memories. However, most work has predominantly focused on traumatic memories. Thus, Contractor and colleagues proposed a Positive Memory-PTSD model, which highlighted potential benefits associated with and mechanisms underlying positive memory retrieval/processing among individuals reporting PTSD symptoms. To enhance research on and clinical impacts of this model, the current review provides critical considerations for the Positive Memory-PTSD model. Drawing from emerging research and clinical observations, we (i) clarify that the model addresses specific versus overgeneral positive memories; (ii) underscore the importance of considering the heterogeneity in, and transitionary nature of, affect processes following positive memory retrieval; and (iii) highlight the rationale for considering trauma type/count and co-occurring conditions, as potential moderators of relations between positive memory processing and PTSD. Hereby, we provide an updated Positive Memory-PTSD model and implications for positive memory interventions drawing from this model.

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

4.2
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