Immediate and Delayed Reactions to Trauma-related Laboratory Research Among Rape Survivors and Controls

Abstract

Ethical implications of laboratory-based experimental trauma research are not well studied. Female rape survivors ( N = 62) and controls ( N = 79) listened to an audio recording of a sexual assault and completed mental health measures and the Reactions to Research Participation Questionnaire-Revised in the first session and again several weeks later. In the first session, mental health symptoms were associated with stronger emotional reactions and personal benefits from participation. Rape survivors also reported stronger emotional reactions than controls, but also more personal benefits, more satisfaction, and fewer perceived drawbacks from participation. Several weeks later, both groups reported diminished posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and rape survivors’ reports of stronger emotional reactions and greater satisfaction with their participation remained significant. Benefit–cost ratios indicate positive responses to participation across groups and time. Findings suggest significant benefits to laboratory trauma research for participants.

Reactions to Laboratory-Based Trauma Research in a Sample of Incarcerated Women

“…Consistent with previous research (Jaffe et al, 2015;Lawyer, et al, 2021;Legerski & Bunnell, 2010), PTSD symptoms were associated with stronger emotional reactions to participation, indicating that incarcerated women with elevated PTSD symptoms are more likely to have stronger emotional reactions to research studies that contain trauma-relevant content. However, rape survivors did not differ from controls on any of the RRPQ-R factors, suggesting that incarcerated women who are rape survivors are not more likely to respond negatively or positively to procedures used here relative to incarcerated women without a rape history.…”

“…We used IBM SPSS Statistics Software to perform analyses and GraphPad Prism to create figures. We report our findings in a manner consistent with Lawyer et al (2021). Specifically, we conducted a nomothetic comparison of responses to the RRPQ-R among rape survivors and controls but also calculated benefit-cost ratios for each participant based on their RRPQ-R responses in order to quantify the relative frequency of positive and negative experiences associated with their participation.…”

“…Harrington et al (1996) and Prenoveau et al (2006) followed up participants after they participated in an experimental study that involved exposing research participants to panicogenic CO 2 in a laboratory setting and found no increased risk for panic attacks at follow-up. In the first trauma-related study of this kind, Lawyer et al (2021) examined immediate and delayed responses among university-student rape survivors and controls participating in a study in which participants disclosed past sexual trauma but also included listening and responding to an audio recording of a dating interaction that culminates in a completed sexual assault used in previous research (Marx & Gross, 1995;Marx, et al, 1997Marx, et al, , 2001Soler-Baillo et al, 2005;Wilson et al, 1999). Consistent with previous findings on research involving disclosure of trauma, Lawyer et al, found that trauma survivors reported stronger emotional reactions than did controls, but also that survivors reported more satisfaction and fewer perceived drawbacks from participation immediately after participation than did controls.…”

“…Since a purely nomothetic approach that compares mean between-group responses between groups may obscure important patterns of either negative or positive responses to research participation, we calculated benefit-cost ratios for individual participants that would better reflect their experiences participating in the study. We followed the same procedure that Lawyer et al (2021) used (which was derived from that described by Collings, 2018). Specifically, we categorized each participant's responses on individual RRPQ-R items as negative (for "Strongly Disagree" and "Disagree"), neutral (for "Neutral"), or positive (for "Agree" and "Strongly Agree").…”

“…Consistent with Lawyer et al (2021), we also examined responses to the RRPQ-R Perceived Drawbacks question: "Had I known in advance what participating would be like I still would have agreed to participate." Answers to this question provide an important indicator of a study's ethical standing in the light of the extent to which participants would be willing to repeat the procedures again.…”