Cognitive Predictors and Risk Factors of PTSD Following Stillbirth: A Short-Term Longitudinal Study.

This short-term longitudinal study investigated cognitive predictors and risk factors of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in mothers following stillbirth. After a stillbirth at ≥ 24 weeks gestational age, 65 women completed structured clinical interviews and questionnaires assessing PTSD symptoms, cognitive predictors (appraisals, dysfunctional strategies), and risk factors (perceived social support, trauma history, obstetric history) at 3 and 6 months. PTSD symptoms decreased between 3 and 6 months (Cohen's d ranged .34-.52). Regression analyses also revealed a specific positive relationship between Rumination and concurrent frequency of PTSD symptoms (β = .45). Negative Self-View and Negative World-View related positively and Self-Blame related negatively to concurrent number of PTSD symptoms (β = .48, .44, -.45, respectively). Suppression and Distraction predicted a decrease and Numbing predicted an increase in time-lagged number of PTSD symptoms (β = -.33, -.28, .30, respectively). Risk factors for PTSD symptoms were younger age (β = -.25), lower income (β = -.29), fewer previous pregnancies (β = -.31), and poorer perceived social support (β = -.26). Interventions addressing negative appraisals, dysfunctional strategies, and social support are recommended for mothers with PTSD following stillbirth. Knowledge of cognitive predictors and risk factors of PTSD may inform the development of a screening instrument.

Brief report : Academic amotivation in light of the dark side of identity formation

The study intended to determine motivational profiles of first-year undergraduates and aimed their characterization in terms of identity processes. First, a cluster analysis revealed five motivational profiles: combined (i.e., high quantity of motivation, low amotivation); intrinsic (i.e., high intrinsic, low introjected and external regulation, low amotivation); "demotivated" (i.e., very low quantity of motivation and amotivation); extrinsic (i.e., high extrinsic and identified regulation and low intrinsic and amotivation); and "amotivated" (i.e., low intrinsic and identified, very high amotivation). Second, using Lebart's (2000) methodology, the most characteristic identity processes were listed for each motivational cluster. Demotivated and amotivated profiles were refined in terms of adaptive and maladaptive forms of exploration. Notably, exploration in breadth and in depth were underrepresented in demotivated students compared to the total sample; commitment and ruminative exploration were under and overrepresented respectively in amotivated students. Educational and clinical implications are proposedand future research is suggested.