Expanding the Traumatic Stress Framework to Incorporate a Socioecological Family Systems Perspective.

Over the past few decades, there has been a growing interest among systemic researchers and clinicians to address issues related to psychological traumatic stress. Yet, research in this area has largely focused on intrapersonal and physiological processes in conceptualizing traumatic stress and its various outcomes. Despite the usefulness of intrapersonally focused models of traumatic stress, this approach has its limitations. Emerging evidence indicates that both proximal contexts, such as family, and distal socioecological contexts, such as political and environmental systems, can have a profound effect on traumatic stress risk, presentation, and recovery. In the present article, we review and synthesize emerging research on traumatic stress and integrate findings from intrapersonally and systemically focused models of traumatic stress. We propose and present evidence for what we term the dynamic socioecological framework of traumatic stress, a heuristic framework for conceptualizing the interactions between different forms of traumatic stress. This framework puts forward the dimensions of traumatic stress typology, severity, and timing, underscoring how traumatic stress risk, presentation, and recovery are highly dependent upon the systems in which people are embedded. We conclude with a discussion of the research and clinical implications of this conceptual framework.

Durante las últimas décadas, ha habido un interés cada vez mayor entre los investigadores y los profesionales clínicos sistémicos en abordar los problemas relacionados con el estrés traumático psicológico. Sin embargo, las investigaciones en esta área se han centrado en gran medida en los procesos intrapersonales y fisiológicos a la hora de conceptualizar el estrés traumático y sus diferentes resultados. A pesar de la utilidad de los modelos intrapersonales de estrés traumático, este enfoque tiene sus limitaciones. Hay nuevos indicios de que los contextos proximales, como la familia, y los contextos socioecológicos distales, como los sistemas políticos y ambientales, pueden tener un efecto profundo en el riesgo, la presentación y la recuperación del estrés traumático. En el presente artículo, analizamos y sintetizamos las investigaciones nuevas sobre estrés traumático e integramos los resultados de los modelos intrapersonales y sistémicos de este tipo de estrés. Proponemos y presentamos pruebas para lo que llamamos el marco socioecológico dinámico del estrés traumático, un marco heurístico para conceptualizar las interacciones entre las diferentes formas de estrés traumático. Este marco propone los aspectos de tipología, intensidad y desarrollo cronológico del estrés traumático, subrayando cómo el riesgo, la presentación y la recuperación del estrés traumático son sumamente dependientes de los sistemas en los cuales están integradas las personas. Terminamos con un debate de la investigación y las consecuencias clínicas de este marco conceptual.

Knowledge of psychology in Cambodia: Exploring the relationships to demographics, psychopathology, and idioms of distress.

Rates of mental health disorders in Cambodia are markedly higher than in other low- or middle-income countries. Despite these high rates, mental healthcare resources remain scarce and mental health stigma is pervasive, particularly for vulnerable populations of young women and individuals of low socioeconomic status. To address this gap, teaching Western mental health treatments and using a mental healthcare framework are recommended within the Cambodian context. However, Western frameworks do not address cultural syndromes or idioms of distress and operate from an individualistic perspective that does not address cultural values and beliefs. The present study employs a mental health literacy framework in an exploratory analysis of rates of psychological knowledge in a nationally representative sample of Cambodian adults (N = 2,690). To address recommendations for increasing mental healthcare, we designed a survey to investigate Cambodians' knowledge about mental health constructs. Results indicated that only 18.9% of Cambodians knew about psychology, and chi-square analyses revealed that women, individuals in rural areas, and individuals with significant distress due to cultural symptoms and syndromes reported knowing about psychology significantly less than their male and non-distressed counterparts. Additionally, those who reported higher income and higher levels of education indicated significantly higher rates of psychological knowledge, as did those with clinically significant rates of PTSD, at a rate of knowledge approaching significance. Implications for this study include the need to tailor interventions and resources to vulnerable populations, to assess the fit of current recommendations for the Cambodian context, and to further emphasize the need for culturally responsive interventions that address all presentations of Cambodian distress and align with understandings of mental health within the nation.