communication with police supervisors and peers as a buffer of work-related traumatic stress

Communication with police supervisorsand peers as a bu�er of work-relatedtraumatic stress

CHRISTINE STEPHENS* AND NIGEL LONG

School of Psychology, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand

Summary Traumatic events are a particular type of stressor that may a�ect police o�cers engagedin front line duties. In this study, speci®c types of social support predicted to bu�er thepsychological and physical health e�ects of trauma are drawn from theory and empiricalevidence in the area of post-traumatic stress. Social support, measured as the content ofcommunication, and the ease of talking about trauma was tested with 527 workingpolice o�cers who responded to a questionnaire survey. Hierarchical regression analysisshowed that the communication variables contributed to the variance in post-traumaticstress disorder and physical symptoms with di�erential e�ects for di�erent aspects ofcommunication. Analysis of the e�ects of traumatic stress on symptoms for sub-groupsat di�erent levels of communication showed that some types of communication, such asthe ease of talking about trauma or positive communications about work, moderate thee�ects of stress for police o�cers, in that higher levels are associated with a weakertrauma±strain relationship. However, some types of communication bu�ered stress onlyat moderate levels and other types may not be protective. These results are discussed interms of the types and sources of social support that are likely to bu�er post-traumaticstress at work. Copyright # 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Introduction

Police work is a purportedly stressful occupation (Beehr, Johnson and Nieva, 1995) and oneparticular strain that the work of police o�cers may include is post-traumatic stress. Potentiallytraumatic experiences, such as life-threatening physical assault or witnessing disturbing images ofdeath, are often part of police work. Police organizations are increasingly concerned with theprevention of the deleterious e�ects of traumatic stressors, which include post-traumatic stressdisorder (PTSD) and a range of physical symptoms (Long, Chamberlain and Vincent, 1992).

There is evidence for the importance of social support in preventing adverse long-termpsychological and physical health disorders following trauma, which comes chie¯y from workwith combat veterans (e.g. Barrett and Mizes, 1988; Boscarino, 1995; Green and Berlin, 1987;Keane et al., 1985; Solomon and Mikulincer, 1990; Solomon, Mikulincer and Avitzur, 1988;

Copyright # 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 4 Spetember 1996Accepted 20 November 1998

Journal of Organizational BehaviorJ. Organiz. Behav. 21, 407±424 (2000)

* Correspondence to: Christine Stephens, School of Psychology, Massey University, Private Bag 11-222, PalmerstonNorth, New Zealand. Tel: �64 6 350 4146; Fax: �64 6 350 5673; e-mail: [email protected]

Solomon, Mikulincer and Habershaim, 1990, Solomon, Mikulincer andWaysman, 1991; Stretch,1986), and with the victims of natural disasters (e.g. Cook and Bickman, 1990; Joseph et al., 1992;Joseph et al., 1993; Madakasira and O'Brien, 1987; Murphy, 1988). This evidence demonstratespositive e�ects for social support: the more social support resources that individuals report, theless likely they are to show long-term adverse health outcomes following trauma.

Social support is a very broad construct and a variety of approaches and types of measureshave been used to explore the relationship between social support and the outcomes of traumaticstress. In spite of the multiplicity of approaches, the causal connections remain unclear(Boscarino, 1995) and the rationale for the inclusion of social support has been largely based onprevious empirical work. In the wider area of the e�ects of stress and social support on health,Cohen and Wills (1985) have suggested the importance of matching the speci®c needs of speci®cstressors to the type of social support that will bu�er stress. Researchers, such asMcIntosh (1991)and Cutrona and Russell (1990), have o�ered empirical support for this notion. Hobfoll andStephens (1990) have also argued for the importance of considering the interaction of socialsupport with particular stressors, using as their examples major stressors such as war. In lookingfor the speci®c types of social support that will bu�er the experience of traumatic stress we turn totheories of PTSD, and empirical support from ®eld, experimental and clinical work.

Support needs following traumatic experience

Theories of traumatic stressHorowitz' (1993) theory of traumatic stress and the development of PTSD, suggests that socialsupport is a moderator of the relationship between traumatic experience and psychologicaldisorder. Horowitz' model proposes phases of response to a traumatic experience in terms ofinformation processing and cognitive schemas. The importance of social support in particular isaccounted for by the `working through' phase which includes forming new schemas or revisingexisting ones. This phase is characterized by progress on thinking and feeling that includescommunicating with others about the stressful themes related to the experience. It is possible thatthe opportunity to talk about the traumatic experience in a supportive environment is anessential aspect of the processing of the new traumatic information which has `shattered' existingschemas (Jano�-Bulman, 1992).

Experimental evidenceSupport for the role of talking about traumatic experience in mitigating its e�ects, comes fromthe experimental work of James Pennebaker and colleagues. Several studies have shown that thedisclosure of traumatic experiences has positive health outcomes (see Pennebaker, 1997 for asummary). Studies in this experimental paradigm found that the disclosure of traumatic experi-ences through either talking or writing was associated with better immune function or long-termhealth bene®ts, when compared with those who wrote about super®cial topics. Two aspects ofthis work are noteworthy here. First, that health gains have not been found through other formsof emotional expression apart from talking or writing. Second, that talking to another person hasbeen found to have a stronger e�ect than writing. Pennebaker (1992) has explained the physicalhealth e�ects of the disclosure of traumatic experience in terms of Horowitz' model; thedevelopment of coherent narratives about traumatic experiences produce cognitive changes. Hefurther suggests (Pennebaker, 1997) that these changes may produce improvements in health bypromoting the cognitive assimilation of disturbing experience and thereby reducing ruminations

Copyright # 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 21, 407±424 (2000)

408 C. STEPHENS AND N. LONG

and ¯ashbacks. Bootzin (1997) suggests that both writing and talking about emotional experi-ences are inherently social activities; to describe a traumatic experience in language requires alistener or con®dant, and writing about emotional experiences is perhaps `a faint copy of talkingto others' (p. 168).

Evidence from ®eld studiesAmong the wide range of measures of social support that have been used to study recovery fromtraumatic experience, it is those that measure perceived emotional support (the provision ofsympathy and intimacy) that have shown the most consistently positive ®ndings in both militaryand civilian populations (Green and Berlin, 1987; Joseph et al., 1993; Keane et al., 1985;Solomon et al., 1988). A speci®c aspect of emotional support has been revealed by qualitativestudies (Murphy, 1988; Norman, 1988; Weinrich, Hardin and Johnson, 1990), in which thevictims of trauma often express the need for, or e�cacy of, talking about their experiences.Support for the importance of disclosure also comes from quantitative analyses (Frye andStockton, 1982; McFarlene, 1988) which found that avoiding discussion of the traumatic experi-ence was associated with increased post-traumatic stress.

Clinical evidenceThere seems to be a consensus among practitioners working with trauma victims, that talkingabout traumatic experiences and expressing emotions connected with the experiences is the mostimportant therapeutic behaviour for relieving post-traumatic anxiety (van der Kolk, 1988; vander Kolk and Saporta, 1993). Stretch (1986) suggests that social support systems are importantfor promoting the abreaction of stressful experiences and Brom and Kleber (1989) discuss theimportance of the social network in allowing a victim to describe the traumatic experiences andthe emotions that they have elicited. Williams (1993) stresses the need for verbal expression indealing with traumatic stress in the work place: `The single most e�ective method for theresolution of traumatic stress is talking about the trauma with others who went through it . . . Ourexperience has been that the support of coworkers during the weeks following the trauma is vitalto resolution.' (p. 932).

Interpersonal communications as social support

Theories of traumatic stress suggest that discussing traumatic events and the associated emotions,especially with those who have shared a similar experience, is a natural coping mechanism forprocessing the e�ects of traumatic experience and avoiding the development of disorder. Thecombined empirical evidence suggests that the opportunity to talk is a speci®c aspect of socialsupport that could bu�er traumatic stress. In the wider social support area, Barnes and Duck(1994) have proposed that daily talk provides the transactional background for social support incrisis situations. Fenlason and Beehr (1994) also describe communications as part of theconceptual de®nition of social support and have provided evidence to show that communicationsare most likely an important part of the provision of emotional social support in particular. Inthe context of the health e�ects of emotional experiences, Bootzin (1997) suggests that theobserved bene®ts for health, of both social support and communication are part of the samerelationship. In this hypothesis, social interaction provides opportunities for people to talk aboutand integrate emotional experiences.


COMMUNICATION AND TRAUMA AT WORK 409

To explore these suggestions, there are two important aspects of talking about traumaticexperiences, as a speci®c supportive activity, that may be considered. The ®rst concerns thecontent of communication. This is an approach that has been developed in the social support areato study the bu�ering e�ects of work-related stress (Beehr, King and King, 1990). It addressesmore directly what actually goes on between people who are giving and receiving support and isalso related to the suggestions that talking about aspects of traumatic experience is the importantcomponent of support. The important sources of such support to be taken into account in apolice work context are peers and supervisors (Buunk and Verhoeven, 1991). The second aspectconcerns the ease of talking about trauma. How easy it is for o�cers to talk about their experi-ences in general should be taken into account, as it is well documented that there are some workplaces in which it is less socially acceptable to disclose distress (Stephens, Long andMiller, 1997).This aspect of social support is more speci®cally related to the needs evoked by the traumaticexperience itself and is drawn from the theoretical, clinical and empirical work on traumatic stressoutcomes described above.

The aim of the present study is to examine social support as a bu�er of traumatic stress in termsof these speci®c support needs. First, it is predicted that there is a positive relationship betweentraumatic experiences and psychological or physical symptoms. Second, communications, inparticular, those about traumatic experiences, and the ease of talking about those experiences,will also be related to psychological and physical symptoms. Third, that communications and theease of communication will moderate the relationship between traumatic stressors and psycho-logical or physical symptoms. The e�ect of this interaction is that as levels of communicationsincrease, the positive relationship between traumatic experience and psychological or physicalsymptoms will be weaker.

The form of the predicted interaction, between traumatic stress and communication as socialsupport, is that of the bu�ering model (Cohen andWills, 1985) in which the deleterious impact ofstress on health is mitigated by the presence of social support. However, there is no theoreticalreason to expect monotonic changes in the traumatic stress±PTSD relationship as social supportincreases. As Cohen and Wills (1985) and McIntosh (1991) have demonstrated in other areas ofstress, the relationship between stressor, strain and moderator is not necessarily linear. Forexample, there may be no e�ect at low levels of support, but some e�ect at moderate or highlevels. Accordingly the predicted moderating e�ects will not necessarily be a uniform change inthe trauma±symptom relationship across all levels of support.

Method

Sample and procedure

One thousand police o�cers who worked in one geographical region of the New Zealand Policewere surveyed by questionnaire. Questionnaires were distributed through the internal mail of theorganization and returned anonymously to the researcher by prepaid post. The return rate was52 per cent, resulting in a total sample of 527 o�cers who were representative of the distributionof rank (constable to superintendent), length of service (1±38 years), type of occupation (generalduties, CIB and tra�c safety), gender (11 per cent female) and age (21±62) among all o�cers ofthe New Zealand Police. No comparable ®gures were available for the level of educationalquali®cation (no school quali®cations to University degree or diploma) which was also measured.



Measures

The questionnaire used in the main study included the measures described below in addition tothe demographic items. The number of items, range and reliability coe�cients for each scale inthe present study are summarized in Table 3.

Psychological symptomsThe civilian version of the Mississippi PTSD scale (Keane, Caddell and Taylor, 1986), was usedto measure PTSD symptoms. The 35 items are based on the DSM-IV diagnostic scale and clinicalexperience (e.g. `My daydreams are very real and frightening' or Ùnexpected noises make mejump') and answered on a 5-point scale with appropriate anchors from `never' or `not at all true'(1) to `very frequently' (5). The respondents in the present study were requested to answeraccording to `. . . the way you have been feeling during the PAST MONTH . . .'. A test of thepsychometric properties of the Civilian Mississippi used with 668 civilians (Vreven et al., 1995)reported acceptable reliability coe�cients (0.86, M � 64.31).

Physical symptomsSymptoms were measured with the Pennebaker Inventory of Limbic Languidness (PILL;Pennebaker, 1982), a 54 item self-report inventory which taps the occurrence of a large number ofcommon physical symptoms and sensations (e.g. headaches, dizziness, sore muscles). Theinstructions for the PILL were modi®ed for use in the present study to match the time over whichPTSD symptoms were assessed. Respondents were asked to ìndicate how much each of thefollowing problems have disturbed you during the last month' on a 5-point scale, from `not at all'to èxtremely'. The measure was scored by summing the rating for each item. Pennebaker (1982)reports an alpha coe�cient reliability estimate of 0.91, when the scale is used as a measure of ageneral proclivity for reporting physical symptoms. Pennebaker also reports good test±retestreliabilities and correlations with health-related work absences and physician or health carecentre visits.

Traumatic eventsThe traumatic stress schedule (Norris, 1990) was used as a basis for the collection of data on pasttraumatic events. The nine items in this instrument were initially developed to examine thefrequency of nine types of potentially traumatic events in a community sample: robbery, physicalassault, sexual assault, tragic death, motor vehicle crash, combat, ®re, natural disaster, otherhazard. Six other items in the same format but relating speci®cally to police duties were added.These items were based on the events listed by the New Zealand Police Trauma Policy for whichmandatory debrie®ng (as potential sources of traumatic stress) is now required: deliberate killingby police o�cers, deliberate or accidental death of a police o�cer, accidental death or injury of amember of the public by a police o�cer, work with victims of disturbing homicides, attendance atsevere accidents, and disaster victim identi®cation work. Each item included information onrepeated experience of an event, time since the event, and whether the event was unrelated topolice work. No method of calculating a traumatic event score provided higher correlations withCivilian Mississippi scores, in the present sample, than simply summing the number of types ofevents experienced, so this was used as the index of traumatic experience.



Measurement of social support

(i) Content of communicationThis measure was based on that developed by Beehr et al. (1990) and Fenlason and Beehr (1994)to measure the content of communications as potential forms of social support between nursesand secretaries and their supervisors and peers in a work context. The scale was adapted for thepresent study in two ways. First, the wording on the items was altered slightly to ®t the policesituation (e.g. `hospital' or `organization' was altered to `station'). Second, following the rationalapproach used by Beehr et al. (1990), three items were added to each scale to test for a furthertype of content of communication: communication about disturbing incidents at work. Thismeasure was scrutinised by police human resource personnel and pilot-tested on a sample of20 police o�cers.

The data from the two sets of 15 items in the main study, designed to measure the content ofcommunication of respondents with their peers and supervisors respectively, were factor analysed.Beehr et al. (1990) and Fenlason and Beehr (1994) had demonstrated homogeneity for the threesubsets of items on their original samples of nurses and secretaries respectively, and the aim was toensure replication for these three subsets across two sources of support and to test the validity ofthe fourth subset. The method of extraction was principal components with varimax rotation(SPSS/PC); four factors were extracted and those variables with loadings greater than 0.45 wereincluded. For contents of communications with peers, varimax converged in a four componentsolution which accounted for 62.1 per cent of the total variance. For content of communicationwith the supervisor, four components, accounting for 69.2 per cent of the variance, were extracted.All variables were simply related to the expected domain of communication and the results ofthese analyses are shown in Tables 1 and 2. (These results support those of Beehr et al. (1990) andFenlason and Beehr (1994). The present analysis was repeated using an oblique rotation and theresulting component structure was the same as that for varimax rotation).

The content of communication indices were formed by computing the mean item score for eachof the four subsets of items: non-job communications, negative communications, positivecommunications and communications about disturbing experiences. The scores on each indexranged from 1 to 5. Coe�cient alpha reliability estimates for the indices across two studiesreported by Beehr et al. (1990) and Fenlason and Beehr (1994) ranged from 0.75 to 0.93.

(ii) Ease of talking about traumaTo include speci®c information regarding the ease of talking about traumatic experience in thework place, two items were used. The respondents were asked to rate how easy it is to talk abouttheir traumatic experiencesÐeither details or feelingsÐat their work place. The two items werecorrelated (r(515) � 0.69, p5 0.001) and so were combined into one measure. The ratings weremade on a 3-point scale over two items, giving a total possible score ranging from 0 to 4.

Analysis

To examine the e�ects of all communication variables on health symptoms, while accounting forTrauma and demographic variables, simple correlations were calculated and two hierarchicalregression analyses were run with Civilian Mississippi and PILL scores as each dependentvariable. The square root of the PILL scores were entered to correct for a positively skeweddistribution. Initial regression runs showed that the demographic variables contributed



minimally to the explained variance, so these variables were omitted from further analysis. TheTrauma variable was entered ®rst, followed by all communication variables as a single block.Three multivariate outliers were identi®ed and excluded from further analyses, as were anyrespondents with missing data on any of the variables (38) leaving a total N of 486 for analysis.

Moderating e�ects of social support were assessed using sub-group analysis as it allowsfor nonlinear relationships and has been described as a useful technique for exploring interactivee�ects of stress and social support (McIntosh, 1991). The sample was trichotomized on eachcommunication variable based on equivalent groups within the range of scores (low, mediumand high). Within each sub-group Trauma and Civilian Mississippi scores were tested forcorrelations with Pearsons r. The equality of correlation coe�cients, for each sub-group, wastested using Fisher's Z transformation for each pair of correlation coe�cients. For each of theseanalyses an alpha level of 0.05 was set. Two-tailed p values are also reported for probability levelslower than 0.01.

Table 1. Loadings on four components and communalities (h2) for principal components extraction andvarimax rotation of 15 `content of communication with peers' items (N � 524)

Items Loadings h2

Non-job Negative Positive Disturbing

We discuss things that are happeningin our personal lives

0.73 0.02 0.10 0.29 0.65

We talk about o�-the-job intereststhat we have in common

0.73 0.04 0.25 0.03 0.61

We share personal information aboutour backgrounds and families

0.78 0.02 0.02 0.22 0.67

We talk about o�-the-jobsocial events

0.72 0.18 0.33 0.03 0.67

We talk about how we dislike someparts of our work

0.06 0.73 0.02 0.28 0.62

We talk about the bad things aboutour work

0.08 0.78 0.03 0.27 0.70

We talk about problems in workingwith the public

0.05 0.66 0.10 0.20 0.50

We talk about how this station is alousy place to work

0.00 0.64 0.30 0.16 0.53

We talk about the good things aboutour work

0.16 0.07 0.80 0.08 0.69

We share interesting ideas aboutpolice work

0.07 0.13 0.74 0.05 0.58

We talk about how this station is agood place to work

0.02 0.27 0.62 0.34 0.59

We talk about the rewarding thingsabout being a police o�cer

0.15 0.13 0.64 0.24 0.52

We talk about jobs that have beenpersonally distressing

0.22 0.19 0.18 0.75 0.69

We discuss parts of the job that havebeen upsetting

0.11 0.32 0.14 0.72 0.66

We discuss situations on the job thathave been terrifying

0.08 0.15 0.23 0.73 0.63

Eigenvalue 4.26 2.38 1.62 1.02 Ð

Cumulative % variance accounted for 28.40 44.40 55.20 62.10 Ð



Results

Descriptive statistics

The mean, S.D., and range for each variable is reported in Table 3. Note that examination of thescores of the three cases that were excluded from the analysis showed that these participants hadscores on the Civilian Mississippi (142±161) outside the range of the present sample. Removingthese three cases also reduced the highest score on the PILL from 149 to the present 113. Thebivariate correlations among the study variables are shown in Table 4. The two outcomevariables, Civilian Mississippi scores and PILL scores, were correlated positively and moderatelystrongly as expected. Trauma was also correlated positively to the PILL and more strongly to theCivilian Mississippi as expected (the Civilian Mississippi is a measure speci®cally designed tocapture the psychological e�ects of trauma). Trauma was also related positively to negative

Table 2. Loadings on four components and communalities (h2) for principal components extraction andvarimax rotation of 15 `Content of Communication with Supervisor' items (N � 524)

Items Loadings h2

Non-job Negative Positive Disturbing

We discuss things that are happeningin our personal lives

0.80 0.16 0.09 0.14 0.70

We talk about o�-the-job intereststhat we have in common

0.80 0.19 0.15 0.14 0.72

We share personal information aboutour backgrounds and families

0.75 0.20 0.14 0.17 0.66

We talk about o�-the-jobsocial events

0.72 0.28 0.13 0.20 0.65

We talk about how we dislike someparts of our work

0.20 0.81 0.02 0.10 0.70

We talk about the bad things aboutour work

0.16 0.73 0.11 0.14 0.59

We talk about problems in workingwith the public

0.22 0.73 0.03 0.29 0.67

We talk about how this station is alousy place to work

0.27 0.72 0.12 0.21 0.66

We talk about the good things aboutour work

0.12 0.12 0.83 0.25 0.78

We share interesting ideas aboutpolice work

0.17 0.15 0.78 0.28 0.74

We talk about how this station is agood place to work

0.09 0.22 0.71 0.14 0.58

We talk about the rewarding thingsabout being a police o�cer

0.14 0.35 0.68 0.03 0.61

We talk about jobs that have beenpersonally distressing

0.16 0.23 0.19 0.82 0.79

We discuss parts of the job that havebeen upsetting

0.21 0.25 0.31 0.74 0.75

We discuss situations on the job thathave been terrifying

0.33 0.23 0.28 0.73 0.78

Eigenvalue 6.23 1.96 1.29 0.90 Ð

Cumulative % variance accounted for 41.50 54.60 63.20 69.20 Ð



communication with peers and negatively to the ease of talking about trauma. The com-munication variables were correlated negatively to both outcome variables as expected, exceptfor negative communications with peers, which was positively related (negative communicationswith supervisors as positive but not signi®cant). The higher the levels of reported com-munications (except for negative content of communication), the fewer physical and psycho-logical health symptoms were generally reported. The communication variables were generallycorrelated positively among themselves, with the strongest relationships being between each typeof communication for supervisors and peers.

Regression of Civilian Mississippi and PILL scoreson communication variables

Step 1

The results of each step are presented in Table 5. The standardized beta coe�cient (Beta) isreported and the total variance explained by this step of the equation is provided (adjustedR2). Trauma was entered ®rst and explained 8 per cent of variance (adjusted R2) on the CivilianMississippi, F(1,484) � 41.49, p5 0.001 and 4 per cent of variance on the PILL, F(1,484) �18.75, p5 0.001. Higher Trauma scores were associated with higher Civilian Mississippi andPILL scores.

Step 2Nine communication variables were then entered into the equations. The added varianceexplained by the second block of variables while controlling for the previous block is given asR2 change. For the Civilian Mississippi the communication variables together explained a further19 per cent in unique variance and with Trauma, 25 per cent total explained variance (AdjustedR2), F(10,475) � 17.16, p5 0.001. Trauma maintained its signi®cant relationship with CivilianMississippi scores. Among the communication variables, ®ve showed beta weights signi®cantlydi�erent from zero: ease of talking about trauma; peer disturbing communication; peer positivecommunication; supervisor non-job communication; and supervisor negative communication.For the PILL the communication variables together explained a further 10 per cent in unique

Table 3. Means, standard deviations, ranges and alpha coe�cients for the study variables

Variables Numberof items

Mean Standarddeviation

Possiblerange

Actualrange

Alphacoe�cients

Trauma 15 4.38 2.11 0±15 0±11 ÐCivilian Mississippi 35 78.50 14.79 35±175 45±126 0.90Physical symptoms 54 23.84 18.45 0±216 0±113 0.92Ease of talking about trauma 2 1.86 1.22 0±4 0±4 0.81Peer disturbing communication 3 2.69 0.71 1±5 1±5 0.81Peer non-job communication 4 3.14 0.63 1±5 1±5 0.80Peer negative communication 4 3.18 0.68 1±5 1±5 0.73Peer positive communication 4 2.97 0.62 1±5 1±5 0.78Supervisor disturbing communication 3 2.11 0.74 1±5 1±4.3 0.89Supervisor non-job communication 4 2.36 0.73 1±5 1±5 0.88Supervisor negative communication 4 2.40 0.70 1±5 1±5 0.84Supervisor positive communication 4 2.66 0.72 1±5 1±4.5 0.86



Table4.Bivariatecorrelations(Pearsonsr)

amongthestudyvariables

12

34

56

78

910

11

1.

Trauma

1.00

2.

CivilianMississippi

0.28{

1.00

3.

PIL

L0.19{

0.59{

1.00

4.

Ease

oftalkingabouttrauma

ÿ0.14{ÿ0

.38{ÿ0

.24{

1.00

5.

Peerdisturbingcommunication

0.04ÿ0

.06ÿ0

.04

0.39{

1.00

6.

Peernon-jobcommunication

0.00ÿ0

.17{ÿ0

.11*

0.28{

0.35{

1.00

7.

Peernegativecommunication

0.14{

0.17{

0.15{

0.01

0.38{

0.15{

1.00

8.

Peerpositive

communication

0.03ÿ0

.25{ÿ0

.19{

0.33{

0.42{

0.32{ÿ0

.03

1.00

9.

Supervisordisturbingcommunication

0.00ÿ0

.14{ÿ0

.09*

0.30

0.55{

0.21{

0.12{

0.31{

1.00

10.Supervisornon-jobcommunication

0.01ÿ0

.21{ÿ0

.19{

0.25{

0.21{

0.40{ÿ0

.06

0.29{

0.53{

1.00

11.Supervisornegativecommunication

0.08

0.07

0.07

0.09*

0.28{

0.13{

0.40{

0.02

0.56{

0.37{

1.00

12.Supervisorpositive

communication

0.05ÿ0

.18{ÿ0

.16{

0.26{

0.30{

0.23{ÿ0

.06

0.61{

0.54{

0.53{

0.30{

*p5

0.05;{p5

0.01.



variance and total variance explained by Trauma and Communication was 12 per cent,F,(10,475) � 7.67, p5 0.001. Trauma maintained its signi®cant relationship with PILL scoresand two communication variables showed beta weights signi®cantly di�erent from zero: ease oftalking about trauma; and supervisor non-job communication. For both equations the resultsshowed congruency with the simple correlations except for one variable. Peer disturbingcommunication was not signi®cantly correlated with Civilian Mississippi scores but was asigni®cant (and positive) contributor to the regression equation. This change in relationshipsuggests that one of the variables in the equation is suppressing irrelevant variance that waspreviously masking the relationship (Tabachnick and Fidell, 1992). Systematic removal of theother variables showed that `ease of talk about trauma' was acting as a `suppressor' variable.

Sub-group analysis

Correlations of Trauma with Civilian Mississippi and PILL scores for each sub-group (low,moderate and high) of communication scores are summarized in Table 6. The signi®cance of thedi�erences between r for each pair of sub-groups is also reported. Interactions with Trauma aredemonstrated for those communication variables in which the strength of the positiverelationship changes signi®cantly across groups. When Civilian Mississippi scores wereconsidered as the dependent variable, two of the nine communication variables showed thesechanges. Moderate levels of Peer negative communications and high and low levels of Supervisornegative communications were related to a weaker relationship between Trauma and PTSD.When the PILL scores were considered, ®ve of the nine communication variables showedsigni®cant changes between groups. Higher levels of Ease of talk about trauma and Peer positivecommunication; moderate levels of Peer disturbing communication; low levels of Peer personalcommunication; and low and high levels of Supervisor negative communication, were related to a

Table 5. Hierarchical regression of PILL and Civilian Mississippi on trauma and all content ofcommunication variables showing beta, adjusted R2 and R2 change (N � 486)

Variables in the equation Civilian Mississippi PILL

Beta Beta

Step 1Trauma 0.28{ 0.19{

Adj. R2 0.08{ 0.04{Step 2Trauma 0.22{ 0.16{Ease of talking about trauma ÿ0.31{ ÿ0.17{Peer disturbing communication 0.15* 0.07Peer non-job communication ÿ0.05 0.00Peer negative communication 0.05 0.05Peer positive communication ÿ0.16{ ÿ0.12Supervisor disturbing communication ÿ0.09 ÿ0.12Supervisor non-job communication ÿ0.11* ÿ0.15*Supervisor negative communication 0.11* 0.10Supervisor positive communication 0.04 ÿ0.01

Adj. R2 0.25{ 0.12{R2 change 0.19{ 0.10{

* p5 0.05; { p5 0.01; { p5 0.001.



weaker Trauma±PILL relationship. The pattern of signi®cant di�erences shown for CivilianMississippi or PILL scores are also re¯ected in the direction of the non-signi®cant changes of thesize and signi®cance of the correlations for each sub-group.

Discussion

As predicted, a positive relationship between traumatic experiences and psychological or physicalsymptoms was found. Communications, in particular, those about the ease of talk abouttraumatic experiences, were related to psychological and physical symptoms. The prediction thathigher social support, measured as communications, would bu�er the relationship between

Table 6. Correlations of trauma with Civilian Mississippi and PILL scores in sub-groups of each content ofcommunication variable (N � 486)

Content of communication Trauma Civilian Mississippi PILL

Mean Mean r r di�. Mean r r di�.

Hard to talk 4.73 85.56 0.25{ r1ÿ r2 5.01 0.23{ r1ÿ r2Moderately easy to talk 4.36 77.52 0.30{ r2ÿ r3 4.48 0.25{ r2ÿ r3*Easy to talk 3.93 71.03 0.19* r1ÿ r3 3.99 ÿ0.03 r1ÿ r3*

L peer disturbing communication 4.35 79.61 0.35{ r1ÿ r2 4.47 0.30{ rrÿ r2{M peer disturbing communication 4.26 77.66 0.22* r2ÿ r3 4.62 0.07 r2ÿ r3H peer disturbing communication 4.40 78.14 0.29{ r1ÿ r3 4.23 0.25{ r1ÿ r3

L peer non-job communication 4.19 80.75 0.18* r1ÿ r2 4.66 0.06 r1ÿ r2*M peer non-job communication 4.65 80.29 0.34{ r2ÿ r3 4.77 0.25{ r2ÿ r3H peer non-job communication 4.17 74.79 0.33{ r1ÿ r3 4.15 0.25{ r1ÿ r3*

L peer negative communication 4.07 77.04 0.36{ r1ÿ r2* 4.33 0.21{ r1ÿ r2M peer negative communication 4.53 77.57 0.18* r2ÿ r3 4.96 0.13 r2ÿ r3H peer negative communication 4.62 82.34 0.24{ r1ÿ r3 4.96 0.20* r1ÿ r3

L peer positive communication 4.21 81.90 0.32{ r1ÿ r2 4.87 0.19{ r1ÿ r2M peer positive communication 4.46 78.19 0.37{ r2ÿ r3 4.34 0.34{ r2ÿ r3*H peer positive communication 4.40 72.69 0.19* r1ÿ r3 4.07 0.09 r1ÿ r3

L supervisor disturbing communication 4.36 80.22 0.32{ r1ÿ r2 4.69 0.20{ r1ÿ r2M supervisor disturbing communication 4.25 79.64 0.32{ r2ÿ r3 4.52 0.28{ r2ÿ r3H supervisor disturbing communication 4.35 74.88 0.23{ r1ÿ r3 4.27 0.12 r1ÿ r3

L supervisor non-job communication 4.17 81.30 0.32{ r1ÿ r2 4.81 0.16* r1ÿ r2M supervisor non-job communication 4.54 79.27 0.28{ r2ÿ r3 4.50 0.18* r2ÿ r3H supervisor non-job communication 4.20 72.86 0.28{ r1ÿ r3 4.04 0.31{ r1ÿ r3

L supervisor negative communication 4.21 77.10 0.23{ r1ÿ r2{ 4.32 0.14 r1ÿ r2{M supervisor negative communication 4.04 78.97 0.44{ r2ÿ r3{ 4.67 0.38{ r2ÿ r3{H supervisor negative communication 4.64 79.71 0.12 r1ÿ r3 4.53 0.03 r1ÿ r3

L supervisor positive communication 4.19 80.91 0.30{ r1ÿ r2 4.83 0.19{ r1ÿ r2M supervisor positive communication 4.43 78.99 0.34{ r2ÿ r3 4.23 0.25{ r2ÿ r3H supervisor positive communication 4.44 73.22 0.27{ r1ÿ r3 4.22 0.20* r1ÿ r3

* p5 0.05; { p5 0.01.L � low; M � medium; H � high.



traumatic stressors and physical or psychological health outcomes was supported only for sometypes of communication: perceptions of the ease of talking about traumatic experiences at work,communications about disturbing experiences, and positive and negative communications aboutwork with peers. Communications about non-work matters with peers were found to interactwith traumatic experiences, in that their relationship with PTSD or physical symptoms wasstronger if there were more of these communications; a `reverse bu�ering' e�ect (Kaufmann andBeehr, 1989). Negative communications with a supervisor about work was also found to weakenthe trauma±strain relationship at both high and low levels of communication. To explore theinter-relationships between these variables and to clarify these ®ndings, we will begin with adiscussion of the two main stages of the analysis.

The regression equation demonstrated that the various types of communication at work takentogether, and taking the e�ects of traumatic experiences into account, explained a signi®cantamount of the variance in PTSD and physical symptoms. These results support the ®ndings ofBeehr and colleagues (1990) and Fenlason and Beehr (1994) regarding the importance of mea-suring the contents of communication with supervisors and peers. The present study extendedthese ®ndings through the inclusion of an additional content of communication variable for thiscontext: `disturbing experiences'.

When the relationships among all the communications variables were taken into account, theease of talking about trauma at work, communications with peers about disturbing events,positive communications with peers about work, non-work and negative communications withthe supervisor were the important aspects of communication in direct relation to PTSDsymptoms. Non-work related communications with the supervisor and the ease of talking abouttrauma were the signi®cant variables in relation to the reported number of physical symptoms.

These results were congruent with the simple correlations, with one exception. Communi-cations with peers about disturbing experiences showed a signi®cant contribution to theequation, although there was no simple bivariate relationship. This was due to the o�cers'perceptions of the ease of talk about trauma. On its own, the reported level of talk aboutdisturbing experiences was not related to PTSD symptoms. However, when the positive impacton psychological symptoms, attributable to how easy it is to talk about these things, wasaccounted for, then the perceived level of such talk was shown to be negatively a�ecting PTSDsymptoms (as was negative communication with the supervisor). The direction of the main e�ectof these two variables on PTSD symptoms was not the expected e�ect and possibly related tohaving something distressing to discuss or complain about. That is, the non-directional e�ect ofcorrelations means that these results may also be interpreted, as o�cers with higher symptomsare more likely to talk about distressing or negative matters. An examination of the e�ects ofthese variables on the trauma-strain relationship at di�erent levels, showed that the relationshipsare more complex than this.

Examining the relationships of trauma and PTSD or physical symptoms, in sub-groups ofo�cers who reported either low, moderate or high levels of each type of communication, wasused to test for the moderating e�ects of these aspects of social support. The results showed thatas the levels of the ease of talk about trauma increased, then the trauma±physical symptomsrelationship was weakened. Among the more direct measures of the content of communicationwith peers, positive talk about work was related, at higher levels, to a signi®cantly weakenedtrauma±physical symptoms relationship. This is similar to the e�ect of the ease of talk. Twoother peer communication variables showed a di�erent pattern. Talk about disturbing experi-ences was related to a weaker trauma±physical symptoms relationship only at moderate levels ofsuch talk. Negative talk about work interacted in the same way with the trauma±psychologicalsymptoms relationship; moderate levels of complaints about work were associated with a weaker



trauma±strain relationship than high or low levels. The non-signi®cant di�erences between thecorrelations showed the same pattern in each case, suggesting that each of these work-relatedaspects of communication with peers has some power to bu�er the health e�ects of work-relatedtraumatic stress. However, talk about disturbing experiences and negative talk about work mayhave negative e�ects at higher levels as well as at the predicted low levels. The fourth peercommunication variable, non-work communications, showed a `reverse bu�ering' e�ect: at lowlevels of reported talk about non-work matters, the trauma±strain relationship was weak andnon-signi®cant, whereas at moderate and high levels it was stronger and signi®cantly correlated.High levels of communication with peers regarding non-work matters may not be helpful in thecase of trauma.

These results point to the di�erential impact of di�erent types of communication with peers.Considering communication in the work place as a speci®c function of social support is useful,but it is also important to attend to the di�erent aspects of communication itself. The presentanalysis has highlighted some interesting relationships among these communication variables inregard to traumatic experience and health outcomes. First, the ease of talking about trauma wasthe variable most closely related to traumatic experiences, as the stressor. The ease of talk alsoshowed the strongest relationship with the outcome variables, in addition to a moderating e�ectin the expected direction on the trauma-strain relationships. Thus, a perception that it is very easyto talk about traumatic experiences at work may be considered bene®cial for the health of thosewith higher levels of traumatic experience.

Communication about disturbing experiences with peers was also regarded as closely related tothe stressor. This variable had a moderating e�ect on the trauma±strain relationship, but only atmoderate levels of such talk. Thus, these ®ndings support the suggestions of Pennebaker (1997)and Bootzin (1997) that talk about distressing experiences will ameliorate the health e�ects oftrauma by contributing to the cognitive processing of that experience, but only up to a point.Moderate levels of talk may be bene®cial, but at high levels of such talk, the trauma±strainrelationship is again stronger. Negative talk about work seems to be functioning in a similar way,which suggests (also demonstrated in the bivariate correlations) that talk about disturbingexperiences is seen in a negative light and as such is detrimental if there is too much of this sort oftalk. This further explains the complex relationship with the ease of talk about trauma, whichapparently accounted for the positive e�ects of talk about disturbing experiences on PTSDsymptoms, leaving the negative e�ects (when averaged across all levels of such talk) to be revealedin the regression equation.

Positive work related communication with peers showed a more straightforward positive e�ecton PTSD symptoms and a bu�ering e�ect on the trauma±strain relationship. Fenlason andBeehr (1994) also found that positive communications bu�ered work-related stress (and negativecommunications resulted in reverse bu�ering). Barnes and Duck (1994) suggest that it is theeveryday communicative contexts that make the provision of crisis-related interactions possible.Thus the positive or negative nature of casual socializing will provide the background for moredirectly supportive communications. It is possible that more positively framed, work-related talkprovides a positive (and apparently bene®cial) background for the assimilation of work-relatedexperiences, including trauma, into `healthy' cognitive schemas (Jano�-Bulman, 1992). As acounterpoint to this conclusion, the `reverse bu�ering' results strongly suggest that talk aboutnon-work matters will not contribute to the process of the assimilation of traumatic stress. The`escapism' or distracting function of non-work talk that has been suggested by Fenlason andBeehr (1994) would not allow for the processing of traumatic experiences. This is also accountedfor by Horowitz' (1993) theory of PTSD, in which denial and avoidance of the experiencecontribute towards the development of the disorder. Overall, these results do not support



suggestions that communications about negative or distressing events promote a cathartic release(e.g. Fenalson and Beehr, 1994; Stretch, 1986). Rather, the suggestion is that the bene®cialassimilation of traumatic stress through talk also includes the development of positive schemas.Accordingly, it is not simply talk about distressing experiences that is important, but the veryquality of that talk, which in turn may be shaped by the negative or positive attitudes towards theexpression of emotion in the work place. These aspects have been discussed lately in terms of thehealth bene®ts of framing traumatic experiences as positive and growth-enhancing experiences,rather than as inescapably negative (e.g. Dunning, 1994; Tedeschi and Calhoun, 1996).

A further important di�erence highlighted by the sub-group analysis was that most of thesupervisor communication variables did not bu�er the trauma±strain relationship. In terms ofspeci®city it is apparent that the source of support is also important. Fenlason and Beehr (1994)also found that communications with the supervisor were not necessarily the most important inbu�ering work-related stressors. In the case of traumatic stress, it is clearly communications withpeers that have more impact on the stress±strain relationship. As Barnes and Duck (1994) pointout, in crisis situations people initially turn to those with whom they have continuous relation-ships. This everyday continuity may be generally better established with peers than withsupervisors. However, one variableÐnegative communications with supervisorsÐdid show aninteraction e�ect and this was one of the strongest relationships. At moderate levels of complain-ing about work with the supervisor, the relationships between trauma and psychological andphysical health symptoms were signi®cantly stronger than at low and high levels of such negativecommunication. Furthermore, this is the opposite pattern to that observed between the levels ofnegative talk with peers. This result was not predicted, but does point to the need to consider, notonly the important di�erences between supervisors and peers as sources of di�erent types ofcommunications, but also what the levels of those communications might be. For instance, asstressful experiences increase negative perceptions of work, police o�cers may ®nd relief incomplaining about work. However, too much complaint about work or talk with others aboutdisturbing experiences may also become burdensome when with peers, although apparently not ifsuch talk is with the supervisor.

Limitations

The results of this study encourage further work in this promising area of the bu�ering functionsof communications at work which could also take account of some of the limitations to anyconclusions we might draw here. First, these ®ndings are limited by the exclusion from the studyof three cases with extreme PTSD and physical symptom scores. Hence, the results do not applyto those who are already su�ering the extreme e�ects of traumatic stress. This is not a severeproblem as the emphasis in such studies is on the prevention of disorder and further symptomsand not on the consideration of those who require specialized clinical treatment. Second, thisexclusion does draw attention to the problem of cross-sectional studies. The present study wasconcerned with theoretical e�ects but there is no evidence here for the direction of any particularrelationship. However, the ®ndings of this study are an encouragement to undertake more di�-cult longitudinal studies in this area. Third, such studies should also take account of problemswith the measures used here. Adding the number of potentially traumatic experiences has beendemonstrated to have an e�ect on symptoms but remains a crude measure that requiresdevelopment. The measure of the ease of talking about trauma at work used in the present studywas limited through the use of only two items. The results suggest that, in the context of



occupational trauma, this is an important social support variable and more attention should begiven to its development.

Conclusions

The ®ndings support previous work that has emphasized the importance of social support as avariable intervening between the experience of trauma and psychological and physical outcomes.There is also encouragement for consideration of the content of communication and opportun-ities to talk about trauma, as important aspects of social support in preventing harmfuloutcomes. It is important to note that the moderating e�ects of such support occur only withspeci®c types of communications and when the support comes from particular sources. In everycontext it is important to continue to work towards an identi®cation of the precise nature of thesupport required, and in the present context, the actual matter of the communications.

As in other studies (e.g. McIntosh, 1991), communications with others have been demon-strated to be not straightforwardly supportive; they have the potential to be harmful too. Inexploring the di�erential e�ects of such aspects of support on the e�ects of work-related trauma,future work will need to take into account some of the questions that have been raised by thisstudy. For example, what is the qualitative nature of the relationship between talking aboutdistressing experiences and negative talk about work? Similarly, what are the aspects of talkabout disturbing experiences that seem positive to police o�cers? Are there work place attitudesthat function to negate some of the bene®cial aspects of communication, and in particular ofdisclosure?

There are also immediate implications for work-place interventions following traumatic stress.The demonstrated importance of communications with peers and the provision of a balancebetween the bene®cial e�ects of talk about distressing experiences and the harmful e�ects thatthese communications may have, supports the development of interventions such as peer-supportprogrammes (Paton, 1990). Such programmes include the provision of trained individuals whoare able to meet the need for communication, without breaking down work-place `mores' of non-disclosure that work to protect the larger group from the damaging e�ects of too muchdisclosure.

References

Barnes, M. K. and Duck, S. (1994). Èveryday communicative contexts for social support'. In: Burleson,B. R., Albrecht, T. L. and Sarason, I. G. (Eds) Communication of Social Support. Messages, Interactinos,Relationships, and Community, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 175±194.

Barrett, T. W. and Mizes, J. S. (1988). `Combat level and social support in the development ofposttraumatic stress disorder in Vietnam veterans', Behaviour Modi®cation, 12, 100±115.

Beehr, T. A., King, L. A. and King, D. W. (1990). `Social support and occupational stress: talking tosupervisors', Journal of Vocational Behavior, 36, 61±81.

Beehr, T. A., Johnson, L. B. and Nieva, R. (1995). Òccupational stress: coping of police and their spouses',Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 3±25.

Bootzin, R. R. (1997). Èxamining the theory and clinical utility of writing about emotional experiences',Psychological Science, 8, 167±169.



Boscarino, J. A. (1995). `Post-traumatic stress and associated disorders among Vietnam veterans: thesigni®cance of combat exposure and social support', Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8, 317±336.

Brom, D. and Kleber, R. J. (1989). `Prevention of post-traumatic stress disorders', Journal of TraumaticStress, 2, 335±351.

Buunk, B. P. and Verhoeven, K. (1991). `Companionship and support at work: a microanalysis of thestress-reducing features of social interaction', Basic and Applied Psychology, 12, 243±258.

Cohen, S. and Wills, T. A. (1985). `Stress, social support, and the bu�ering hypothesis', PsychologicalBulletin, 98, 310±357.

Cook, J. D. and Bickman, L. (1990). `Social support and psychological symptomatology following anatural disaster', Journal of Traumatic Stress, 3, 541±556.

Cutrona, C. E. and Russell, D. W. (1990). `Type of social support and speci®c stress: toward a theory ofoptimal matching'. In: Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I. G. and Pierce, G. R. (Eds) Social Support: anInteractional view, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 319±366.

Dunning, C. (1994). `Trauma and counter transference in the workplace'. In: Wilson, P. J. and Lindy, J. D.(Eds) Counter transference in the Treatment of PTSD, Guilford Press, New York, pp. 351±367.

Fenlason, K. J. and Beehr, T. A. (1994). `Social support and occupational stress: e�ects of talking toothers', Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 157±175.

Frye, J. S. and Stockton, R. A. (1982). `Discriminant analysis of posttraumatic stress disorder among agroup of Vietnam veterans', American Journal of Psychiatry, 139, 52±56.

Green, B. L. and Berlin, M. A. (1987). `Five psychosocial variables related to the existence of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms', Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 643±649.

Hobfoll, S. E. and Stephens, M. A. P. (1990). `Social support during extreme stress: consequences andintervention'. In: Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I. G. and Pierce, G. R. (Eds) Social Support: an InteractionalView, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 454±481.

Horowitz, M. J. (1993). `Stress±response syndromes: a review of posttraumatic stress and adjustmentdisorders'. In: Wilson, J. P. and Raphael, B. (Eds) International Handbook of Traumatic StressSyndromes, Plenum Press, New York.

Jano�-Bulman, R. (1992). Shattered Assumptions: Towards a New Psychology of Trauma, The Free Press,New York.

Joseph, S., Andrews, B., Williams, R. and Yule, W. (1992). `Crisis support and psychiatric sympto-matology in adult survivors of the Jupiter cruise ship disaster', British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31,63±73.

Joseph, S., Yule, W., Williams, R. and Andrews, B. (1993). `Crisis support in the aftermath of disaster: alongitudinal perspective', British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32, 177±185.

Kaufmann, G. M. and Beehr, T. A. (1989). Òccupational stressors, individual strains, and social supportsamong police o�cers', Human Relations, 42, 185±197.

Keane, T. M., Caddell, J. M. and Taylor, K. L. (1986). The Mississippi Scale, VA Medical Centre, Boston,MA.

Keane, T. M., Scott, W. O., Chavoya, G. A., Lamparski, D. M. and Fairbank, J. A. (1985). `Social supportin Vietnam veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder: a comparative analysis', Journal of Consultingand Clinical Psychology, 53, 95±102.

Long, N., Chamberlain, K. and Vincent, C. (1992). `The health and mental health of New ZealandVietnam war veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder', The New Zealand Medical Journal, 105,417±419.

Madakasira, S. and O'Brien, K. F. (1987). Àcute traumatic stress disorder in victims of a natural disaster',The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175, 286±290.

McFarlane, A. C. (1988). `The longitudinal course of posttraumatic morbidity: the range of outcomes andtheir predictors', The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 176, 30±39.

McIntosh, N. J. (1991). Ìdenti®cation and investigation of properties of social support', Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 12, 201±217.

Murphy, S. A. (1988). `Mediating e�ects of intrapersonal and social support on mental health 1 and 3 yearsafter a natural disaster', Journal of Traumatic Stress, 1, 155±172.

Norman, E. M. (1988). `Post-traumatic stress disorder in military nurses who served in Vietnam during thewar years 1965±1973', Military Medicine, 154, 238±242.

Norris, F. H. (1990). `Screening for traumatic stress: a scale for use in the general population', Journal ofApplied Social Psychology, 20, 408±418.



Paton, D. (1994). Dealing with Traumatic Incidents in the Workplace, (2nd ed.), Gull Publishing,Queensland, Australia.

Pennebaker, J. W. (1994). The Psychology of Physical Symptoms, Springer-Verlag, New York.Pennebaker, J. W. (1992). `Inhibition as the lynch-pin of health'. In: Friedman, H. S. (Ed.)Hostility, Copingand Health, American Psychological Association, Washington, pp. 127±139.

Pennebaker, J. (1997). `Writing about emotional experiences as a therapeutic process', PsychologicalScience, 8, 162±166.

Pogrebin, M. R. and Poole, E. D. (1991). `Police and tragic events: the management of emotions', Journalof Criminal Justice, 19, 395±403.

Solomon, Z. and Mikulincer, M. (1990). `Life events and combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder: theintervening role of locus of control and social support', Military Psychology, 2, 241±256.

Solomon, Z., Mikulincer, M. and Avitzur, E. (1988). `Coping, locus of control, social support, and combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder: a prospective study', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,55, 279±287.

Solomon, Z., Mikulincer, M. and Habershaim, N. (1990). `Life-events, coping strategies, social resources,and somatic complaints among combat stress reaction casualties', British Journal of Medical Psychology,63, 137±148.

Solomon, Z., Mikulincer, M. and Waysman, M. (1991). `Delayed and immediate onset posttraumatic stressdisorder: the role of life events and social resources', Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 231±236.

Stephens, C., Long, N. and Miller, I. (1997). `The impact of trauma and social support on posttraumaticstress disorder: a study of New Zealand Police O�cers', Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 303±314.

Stretch, R. H. (1986). `Incidence and etiology of post-traumatic stress disorder among active duty armypersonnel', Journal of Applied Psychology, 16, 464±481.

Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using Multivariate Statistics, (2nd ed.), Harper & Row, NewYork.

Tedeschi, R. G. and Calhoun, L. G. (1996). `The posttraumatic growth inventory: measuring the positivelegacy of trauma', Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9, 455±471.

van der Kolk, B. A. (1988). `The trauma spectrum: the interaction of biological and social events in thegenesis of the trauma response', Journal of Traumatic Stress, 1, 273±290.

van der Kolk, B. A. and Saporta, J. (1993). `Biological response to psychic trauma'. In: Wilson, J. P. andRaphael, B. (Eds) International Handbook of Traumatic Stress Syndromes, Plenum Press, New Yorkpp. 25±33.

Vreven, D. L., Gudanowski, D. M., King, L. A. and King, D. W. (1995). `The civilian version of theMississippi PTSD scale: a psychometric evaluation', Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8, 91±109.

Weinrich, S., Hardin, S. B. and Johnson, M. (1990). `Nurses respond to hurricane Hugo victims' disasterstress', Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 4, 195±205.

Williams, T. (1993). `Trauma in the workplace'. In: Wilson, J. P. and Raphael, B. (Eds) InternationalHandbook of Traumatic Stress and Syndromes, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 925±934.



communication with police supervisors and peers as a buffer of work-related traumatic stress

Documents