Posttraumatic stress symptom severity is associated with impaired processing of emotional faces in a large international sample.

Trauma exposure and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) are associated with biases in emotional face processing. Existing research has utilized a variety of methodological techniques to demonstrate hyperreactivity to threatening cues in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD; i.e., fearful faces), but studies to date have shown conflicting findings, including both increased and decreased time fixating on fearful faces. Moreover, the impact of PTSS severity on emotional face processing in the general population is unknown, as the generalizability of prior work is limited. The current study aimed to examine the associations between PTSS and sensitivity to detecting differences in fearful, angry, and happy faces in a large international sample. Participants were 1,182 visitors (Mage = 31.13 years, SD = 13.57, range: 18-85 years) to TestMyBrain.org who completed three emotion sensitivity tasks and the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5. The results indicated that higher PTSS scores were associated with poorer performance in detecting happiness, fear, and anger, ps < .001, with the largest effect for fear, f 2 = .06, controlling for age and gender. Participants who experienced more recent and more direct trauma exposure displayed higher levels of PTSS, with a small but significant effect whereby more direct trauma exposure was associated with higher (i.e., better) scores for anger and fear, f2 s = .02. Women showed heightened sensitivity to detecting fear compared to men, d = 0.17. The present findings underscore the value of citizen science initiatives that allow researchers to obtain clinical data from diverse samples with a high degree of PTSS variability.

Is a Criterion A trauma necessary to elicit posttraumatic stress symptoms?

OBJECTIVE: The posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnosis has undergone substantial revision since its first appearance in the DSM-III. Much of the controversy surrounds the definition of trauma, or Criterion A. Our study sought to evaluate the DSM-5-TR's Criterion A and severity of PTSD symptoms in college students. METHOD: Participants were 1500 college students who completed an online questionnaire about mental health symptoms. Responses to the Criterion A assessment were double coded by researchers to determine if the DSM-5-TR's Criterion A was met. Interpersonal agreement between raters was high (kappa = .81). Participants were compared across groups based on their PTSD Criterion A status: (1) DSM-Congruent, (2) DSM-Incongruent, (3) DSM-Ambiguous, and (4) Denied Trauma, using analysis of variance and multiple regression. RESULTS: Participants who reported a trauma that was coded as Criterion A by researchers had the highest levels of PTSD symptoms, even after controlling for perceived stress, depression, anxiety, and gender (p < .001). Comparing across groups, the DSM-Congruent Criterion A group had significantly higher overall PTSS than those in the DSM-Incongruent Criterion A group and also significantly higher hyperarousal symptoms. However, the DSM-Congruent Criterion A group did not differ from the DSM-Ambiguous trauma group on any PTSD symptom cluster. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of significant differences in scores between individuals with DSM- Congruent, DSM-Incongruent, and DSM-Ambiguous traumas provides evidence about the subjective nature of trauma and how college-age individuals interpret their symptoms of PTSD. Clinical implications are discussed.

Acceptability and Outcomes of Transdiagnostic Guided Self-help Bibliotherapy for Internalizing Disorder Symptoms in Adults: A Fully Remote Nationwide Open Trial.

Introduction: Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) is a five-module transdiagnostic guided self-help (GSH) intervention developed by the World Health Organization, originally in a group-based format. In a sample of individuals recruited from across the United States, we conducted an open trial to study the feasibility and acceptability of an adaptation of DWM in which guidance was provided individually and remotely via phone and videoconferencing. Methods: We assessed internalizing symptoms, psychological well-being, work and social functioning, usability of the intervention, and emotion regulation over the course of 6 weeks. Results: A total of 263 individuals completed our screening. Of those, 75.29% (n = 198) qualified for the intervention. We reached most participants who qualified (71.21%, n = 141) via phone to schedule a GSH session. Most of those scheduled attended a study session (84.4%, n = 119), and most of those who attended a session completed more than half the treatment (84.03%, n = 100). Retention rates were comparable to meta-analytic estimates of dropout rates in GSH. Participants showed improvement on internalizing symptoms, psychological well-being, work and social functioning, usability of the intervention, and emotion regulation. Conclusion: DWM is a freely available, seemingly efficacious transdiagnostic intervention for internalizing disorder symptoms. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10608-022-10338-5.