1986
DOI: 10.1521/jscp.1986.4.4.447
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpersonal Response to Spinal Cord Injury

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

1986
1986
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Then, the partner eventually develops his or her own depressive symptoms, hostile feelings, ambivalent support, and withdrawal from the depressed person 10, 12. Three decades of research have supported the idea of this interpersonal systemic response to depressive symptoms in couples 13–18. Several of these studies have examined the interactional model for depression in adults with heart disease 13, 14 as well as spinal cord injury 15–18 and found support for components of the model in medically ill populations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Then, the partner eventually develops his or her own depressive symptoms, hostile feelings, ambivalent support, and withdrawal from the depressed person 10, 12. Three decades of research have supported the idea of this interpersonal systemic response to depressive symptoms in couples 13–18. Several of these studies have examined the interactional model for depression in adults with heart disease 13, 14 as well as spinal cord injury 15–18 and found support for components of the model in medically ill populations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Six separate items assessing subject willingness to meet the actor, sit beside the actor on a three-hour bus ride, seek advice from the actor, share an office or work with the actor, invite the actor to the subject's house, and approve of the actor marrying a relative, were used to assess personal rejection (Hammen & Peters, 1977). These items have been used in previous studies of depression and disability (Frank et al, 1987b; Frank et al, 1986) and evidenced acceptable reliability (alpha = .90) with the present sample. Responses to each individual item are summed to obtain a total score.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Applications of social models of depression in rehabilitation have found that subjects (including rehabilitation staff) reject involvement with depressed targets who are disabled, and prefer to interact with those who are not depressed (Corcoran, Frank, & Elliott, in press; Elliott & Umlauf, 1987; Frank, Elliott, Wonderlich, Corcoran, Umlauf, & Ashkanazi, 1987; Frank, Wonderlich, Corcoran, Umlauf, Ashkanazi, Brownlee-Duffeek, & Wilson, 1986). Subjects who avoid persons with disability may be reacting to their expectations that the person would be sad and depressed.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The present study provides evidence that depressed rehabilitation patients also encounter negative cognitive reactions from nursing staff and fellow patients. An earlier study by Frank et al (1986) found that rehabilitation personnel have negative reactions to depressed patients with disability. The current study extends this work to demonstrate that these negative reactions are not consistently moderated by the presence of a physical disability and negative reactions can be engendered among patients as well as staff.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%