Investigating the Effects of Trauma-Related Research on Well-Being

Abstract

Using an experimental design, we investigated the impact of participation in trauma-related research on well-being in a sample of 219 higher education students. We created five conditions that exposed participants to questions about life events. A sixth condition represented a control condition. Exposure conditions varied according to whether they contained yes/no questions about events that entailed stress, stigma, trauma, or sexual violation. We operationalized well-being by measuring positive and negative affect, state anxiety, and positive reactions to research. Across exposure conditions, participants reported low levels of negative affect and generally positive reactions immediately after participation. The most negative and least positive responses followed exposure conditions that contained questions about stressful events and sexual violation. We discuss implications of our findings for ethics review board practices.

Impact of violence research on participants over time: Helpful, harmful, or neither?

“…In spite of the dampening impact on positive affect immediately and 24 hours post-exposure, those who answered questions about sexually violating events reported fewer perceptions of drawbacks compared to all other participants. This finding adds to the growing literature suggesting that even when negative effects occur, respondents may not view their experience negatively (Cook et al, 2011; Edwards et al, 2009; Edwards et al, 2012b; Newman & Kaloupek, 2004). At first these findings seem paradoxical, but Newman & Kaloupek (2004) theorize that negative impacts signal engagement with the study.…”

“…The process resulted in equivalent exposure conditions with questions about 40 events in each. Details can be found in Cook et al (2011).…”

“…A small but expanding literature demonstrates few negative effects on participants involved in victimization research, and even some minor benefits (Legerski & Bunnell, 2010). The bulk of these data are limited, however, to cross-sectional studies that preclude causal conclusions with three exceptions (Ferrier-Auerbach, Erbes, & Polusney, 2009; Cook et al, 2011; & Yeater, Miller, Rinehart, & Nason, 2012). These studies move the field forward; but to date no experimental study has examined effects of participation, particularly in research on sexual victimization, over time.…”

Addressing Ethical Issues in Studying Men’s Traumatic Stress

“…27,28 To determine the level of risk in traumatic stress research, investigators have diversely employed risk-benefit analyses, 29 the minimal risk approach, 30 and often a combination of the two. 12 Generally, the level of risk has been assessed as tolerable with benefits of participation outweighing the risks, and traumatic stress research posing no more than minimal risk. 6 However, evidence suggests that the risk-benefit ratio for men's traumatic stress research may be less favourable.…”

“…8 To date, however, these studies have focussed on female-only samples [9][10][11] or have not accounted for gender in their analyses of mixed-sex samples. 12,13 By extension, some ethical issues that are ever relevant to men's traumatic stress research remain poorly understood. After briefly exploring why ethical issues in men's traumatic stress research are underexplored, this article details several evidence-based ethical issues that should be thoughtfully considered and addressed to advance the field.…”