Positive emotions in earthquake survivors in El Salvador (2001)
Introduction
According to the World Disasters Report (IFRC-RCS, 2002) in 2001, approximately 170 million people were affected by natural disasters, catastrophes, and wars. Natural disasters were responsible for the death of 665,598 persons between 1991 and 2000, and 39,073 people were reportedly killed by disasters in 2001. The majority of persons affected by disasters live in countries from the southern hemisphere, which suggests that the increase in disasters is related not only to geographic vulnerability factors, but essentially to socioeconomic factors. In fact, on average 13 times more people die due to disasters in poor countries than in developed countries (IFRC-RCS, 2002).
It has been suggested that, natural disasters probably do not have such undesirable consequences as do traumatic events caused by humans (e.g., wars, interpersonal violence, homicides, etc.), because natural disasters do not have a component of intentionality in the damage produced, which may shatter people’s core life assumptions about a just and predictable world (Janoff-Bulman, 1992). However, natural events may have devastating consequences in another sense. For example, their typically sudden and unexpected occurrence could foment the psychological conditions of helplessness and vulnerability (Weaver & Clum, 1996). In addition, the losses that these events cause are usually multiple in an individual sense (loss of home, belongings, work, and even of loved ones) as well as in a collective sense (destruction of the social framework, community destructuring, loss of mutual support networks, etc.), with their associated mourning processes (Eisenbruch, 1991; Martı́n-Beristain, Dona, Páez, Pérez-Sales, & Fernández, 2000).
Section snippets
Life events, psychopathology, and resilience
Much of the current literature concerning the psychological consequences of traumatic events has focused on the concept of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Studies of the general population indicate a lifetime prevalence of “traumatic events” in more than 50% (Breslau, Davis, & Andreski, 1995). Taking into account that the estimated lifetime prevalence of PTSD is only 1–3% in the general population (5–15%, if the less severe forms are included)—Kessler (2000)—it is evident that research
Sample
The interviews were carried out with a random sample, stratified by sex, group, and shelter (the Cafetalón vs. Santa Gertrudis). Interviews were performed with 115 persons from the Cafetalón (63) shelter and the Santa Gertrudis shelter (52). Their age ranged from 18 to 72. Forty-two percent of the participants were men (M=37.7, S.D.=17.3).
Participants were selected through a random process consisting of interviewing every adult in one of every three tents in both camps. To avoid sampling biases
Procedure
The interviews were performed by a team of six people from the Department of Psychology of the José Simeón Cañas University, supervised by one of the authors (P.C.), and by psychologists from El Salvador who belonged to the Doctors Without Frontiers-Holland organization, and who were actually working in the shelters. All interviews were carried out between April 4 and 6, 2001 and the approximate duration of each interview was 45 min. There was an 8% rejection rate.
The interviewer began by asking
Results
In this section, we present the combined data from the users of the two shelters (Table 1), who, with the exception of the item about recalling some moment of happiness, revealed no statistically significant differences in any of the remaining items about positive aspects related to the disaster experience. Nor were there significant differences regarding sex and age in the composition of the samples from both shelters. Lastly, all the combined results of both shelters were analyzed by sex and
Discussion and comments
We believe these results should be discussed within the context of the theoretical framework of homeostatic emotional regulation, according to which, after an important vital event has occurred, people start to use active strategies to reestablish their emotional well-being. For example, according to the dynamic equilibrium model (Headey & Wearing, 1992), everyone has a set-point in subjective well-being, to which they try to return via regulatory strategies every time it is interrupted by an
Conclusions
Despite the scarcity of research on psychological resistance mechanisms, Folkman and Moskowitz (2000) have hypothesized that there are three types of coping that may be effective to generate positive emotions when experiencing adverse life events: (a) positive reappraisal, (b) problem-focused coping, and (c) lending positive meaning to ordinary life events. A closer look at the results of our study may show that, even in extraordinarily difficult circumstances, these mechanisms seem to operate,
References (60)
From post-traumatic stress disorder to cultural bereavement: diagnosis of Southeast Asian refugees
Social Science and Medicine
(1991)Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress
Social Science and Medicine
(1997)- et al.
Learned helplessness in humans: critique and reformulation
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
(1978) Dysphoria and social comparison: combining information regarding others’ performances
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology
(1991)- et al.
Hopelessness theory of depression: tests of the symptom component
Cognitive Therapy and Research
(1998) - Aspinwall, L. G. (2001). Dealing with adversity: self-regulation, coping, adaptation and health. In: A. Tesser & N....
- Aspinwall, L. G., & Brunhart, S. M. (2000). What I do know won’t hurt me: optimism, attention to negative information,...
- Avia, M. D., & Vázquez, C. (1998). Optimismo inteligente. Psicologı́a de las emociones positivas. (Prefacio de Martin...
- Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In: A. Bandura (Ed.),...
- Baum, A., & Posluszny, D. M. (2001). Traumatic stress as a target for intervention with cancer patients. In: A. Baum &...
Risk factors for PTSD-related traumatic events: a prospective analysis
American Journal of Psychiatry
A dual representation theory of posttraumatic stress disorder
Psychological Review
Maintaining life satisfaction: the role of positive cognitive bias
Journal of Happiness Studies
The happy personality: a meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being
Psychological Bulletin
Subjective well-being: three decades of progress
Psychological Bulletin
Negotiating reality after physical loss: hope, depression, and disability
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Positive affect and the other side of coping
American Psychologist
The role of positive emotions in positive psychology
American Psychologist
Measuring trauma and health status in refugees
JAMA
Posttraumatic stress disorder: the burden to individual and to society
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Positive adaptation to trauma: wisdom as both process and outcome
Journal of Traumatic Stress
Why are some people happier than others? The role of cognitive and motivational processes in well-being
American Psychologist
Cited by (68)
Developing a hybrid risk assessment method for prioritizing the critical risks of temporary accommodation sites after destructive earthquakes
2022, Habitat InternationalCitation Excerpt :Extant literature (Asefi & Farrokhi, 2018; Bettemir, 2016; Tierney et al., 2004; Yuksel & Hasirci, 2012) categorized the problems caused by heat and cold weather (R1) and the challenge of incidence of strong rains and floods (R3) as the second-highest risks of the temporary settlement process after the earthquakes. The results of this study are also consistent with the investigations by Omidvar and Binesh (2012), VáZquez, Cervellón, Pérez-Sales, Vidales, and Gaborit (2001), and Yuksel and Hasirci (2012), which regarded risks related to R2, R4, R5, R6, R8, R10, and R11 as significant hazard risks. Also, previous studies confirmed that the risks identified in this study have been among the critical risks in the temporary accommodation processes in other climes (Asefi & Farrokhi, 2018; Comerio, 1998; Cordero-Reyes et al., 2017; Félix et al., 2015; Tierney et al., 2004; Tomioka, 1997; Yuksel & Hasirci, 2012).
Public health implications of multiple disaster exposures
2022, The Lancet Public HealthCitation Excerpt :25 studies focused on factors influencing wellbeing and resilience in settings of multiple disas-ters,31,33,34,38–40,42,44,45,47,49,50,55,62,68,77,82,83,115–121 including religiosity and the role of religion on coping,38,40,45,47,49 social support,45 the will to live,116 gender,45 perceived collective efficacy,115,120 and perceived communal coping,119 with mixed findings across different disaster contexts. One subset of articles focused on identifying patterns in positive emotions and post-traumatic growth following multiple disasters,33,42,50,55,83,117,120 with some studies highlighting that hope and optimism33 or psychological resilience42 can be protective factors for mental health after multiple disasters or can facilitate coping and resilience after multiple disasters.50 More widely, wellbeing and resilience have generally been insufficiently studied following multiple disasters.
Subjective Well-Being Impacts of Natural Hazards: A Review
2020, Economic Effects of Natural Disasters: Theoretical Foundations, Methods, and ToolsThe mental health costs of human displacement: A natural experiment involving indigenous Indian conservation refugees
2016, World Development PerspectivesCitation Excerpt :However, unlike much of the displaced peoples literature that focuses on distress and thus compromised mental health, we turned our attention to the full range of mental health experience. We demonstrated how displacement can also compromise positive subjective emotional states—such as happiness, life satisfaction, optimism, and the well-being of one’s spirit—a topic much less thoroughly studied or understood (Vázquez et al., 2005). Too, human displacement exacts physical tolls on the body, with the Sahariyas’ mental and physical well-being tightly intertwined in health “syndemics” (Mendenhall, 2012; Singer & Clair, 2003).
“Hey American! What Is Up?” At-Risk Men’s Experiences Before and While Waiting for Evacuation Flights and After Returning Home
2023, Journal of Human Rights and Social Work
- 1
The work team was made up of Nadine Arias, Josune Martı́nez, Carlos Flores, Ernesto Martı́nez, David Juárez, Jessica Trinidad (UCA-El Salvador), and Moisés Marinero, Jerry Montano, Patricia Barber, Lizet Mejı́a, and Patricia Berrios (Doctors Without Borders-Holland).