Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Intimate Relationship Problems: A Meta-Analysis
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Intimate Relationship Problems: A Meta-Analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0022196
复制
发表时间：
2011-02-01
影响因子：
5.9
通讯作者：
Monson, Candice M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Taft, Casey T.;Watkins, Laura E.;Monson, Candice M.
目的：对创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）指标与亲密关系问题相关的实证研究进行meta分析，对相关文献进行实证综合。方法：采用PsycINFO、Medline、Published International literature on Traumatic Stress （PILOTS）和Dissertation Abstracts进行文献检索。作者确定了31项符合纳入标准的研究。结果：PTSD与亲密关系不和谐（p = 0.38, N = 7,973, K = 21）、亲密关系身体攻击行为（p = 0.42, N = 4,630, K = 19）、亲密关系心理攻击行为（p = 0.36, N = 1,501, K = 10）存在中等程度的相关性。PTSD和关系不和谐之间的关联强度在军人（与平民相比）样本中更高，当研究在美国（与其他国家相比）进行时，研究代表了博士论文（与发表的文章相比）。在军事（与平民）样本、男性（与女性）样本、社区（与临床）样本、研究PTSD症状严重程度（与诊断）的研究中，当身体攻击测量只关注严重暴力（与更具包容性的测量），并且研究已发表（与论文相比）时，PTSD与身体攻击之间的关联强度更高。对于创伤后应激障碍心理攻击关联，98%的方差是由抽样和测量误差等方法人为因素造成的；因此，在这种关系中没有检查调节因子。结论：研究结果强调有必要研究解释与PTSD症状学相关的关系困难的模型，并设计干预措施来治疗这两个领域的问题。
Objective: The authors conducted a meta-analysis of empirical studies investigating associations between indices of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and intimate relationship problems to empirically synthesize this literature. Method: A literature search using PsycINFO, Medline, Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress (PILOTS), and Dissertation Abstracts was performed. The authors identified 31 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Results: True score correlations (p) revealed medium-sized associations between PTSD and intimate relationship discord (p = .38, N = 7,973, K = 21), intimate relationship physical aggression perpetration (p = .42, N = 4,630, K = 19), and intimate relationship psychological aggression perpetration (p = .36, N = 1,501, K = 10). The strength of the association between PTSD and relationship discord was higher in military (vs. civilian) samples, and when the study was conducted in the United States (vs. other country), and the study represented a doctoral dissertation (vs. published article). The strength of the association between PTSD and physical aggression was higher in military (vs. civilian) samples, males (vs. females), community (vs. clinical) samples, studies examining PTSD symptom severity (vs. diagnosis), when the physical aggression measure focused exclusively on severe violence (vs. a more inclusive measure), and the study was published (vs. dissertation). For the PTSD psychological aggression association, 98% of the variance was accounted for by methodological artifacts such as sampling and measurement error; consequently, no moderators were examined in this relationship. Conclusions: Findings highlight a need for the examination of models explaining the relationship difficulties associated with PTSD symptomatology and interventions designed to treat problems in both areas.