| Literature DB >> 31396131 |
Guido Veronese1, Alessandro Pepe1, Federica Cavazzoni1, Hania Obaid1, Jesus Perez2.
Abstract
Adopting an ecological perspective on children's functioning and psychological well-being, we investigated the association between agency and life satisfaction, and its bearing on trauma symptoms and negative emotions in a group of Bedouin children living in the occupied Palestinian territories. Specifically, we hypothesized that the more children were agentic, the more they would be satisfied with their lives; and that greater life satisfaction would be associated with better affect balance, and reduced trauma symptoms. A sample of 286 Bedouin children attending primary schools in four different villages in the Jordan Valley completed the multidimensional students' life satisfaction scale (MSLSS), positive affect and negative affect scale for children (PANAS-C), Children's Impact of Event Scale (CRIES-13), and the children's hope scale (CHS). Structural equation modeling was performed to evaluate the cumulative network of direct and indirect effects between children's agency, life satisfaction, and trauma symptoms. The findings confirmed the key role of life satisfaction in mitigating traumatic reactions. Higher levels of life satisfaction were associated with reduced negative emotions and trauma symptoms, suggesting that agency may be viewed as a pre-determining factor with the potential to protect children from trauma symptoms. We discuss the implications for research and clinical practice.Entities:
Keywords: agency; children; life satisfaction; psychological trauma; war
Year: 2019 PMID: 31396131 PMCID: PMC6664087 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01674
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Conceptual model of pathways connecting latent variables and observed indicators. Arrows indicate direct effects between variables; ellipses indicate latent variables; and rectangular boxes represent observed variables. Age and gender were modeled as covarying variables.
Frightening events check-list.
| Military violence | 17 (30) | 39 (70) | 56 (32.5) |
| Israeli occupation | 15 (50) | 15 (50) | 30 (17.4) |
| Unsafe environment | 8 (89) | 1 (11) | 9 (5.2) |
| Community and/or family violence | 3 (33) | 6 (67) | 9 (5.2) |
| Wild animals | 25 (45) | 30 (55) | 55 (32) |
| Horror movies | 2 (29) | 5 (71) | 7 (4.1) |
Main descriptive statistics for quantitative measures.
| 1. Agency | 3.00 | 15.00 | 11.98 | 3.03 | –0.98 | 0.02 | 0.76 |
| 2. Pathway | 3.00 | 15.00 | 11.94 | 2.95 | –0.98 | –0.65 | 0.71 |
| 3.Satisfaction w. Family | 4.00 | 20.00 | 14.42 | 2.08 | –1.58 | 1.65 | 0.74 |
| 4. Satisfaction w. Friends | 4.00 | 20.00 | 13.36 | 2.56 | –0.69 | 0.14 | 0.56 |
| 5. Satisfaction w. School | 3.00 | 15.00 | 10.31 | 2.40 | –1.35 | –0.19 | 0.77 |
| 6. Satisfaction w. Environment | 3.00 | 15.00 | 10.69 | 2.24 | –0.60 | 1.81 | 0.53 |
| 7. Intrusion/Hyper-arousal | 4.00 | 20.00 | 9.31 | 3.27 | 0.16 | –0.16 | 0.73 |
| 8. Avoidance | 5.00 | 25.00 | 11.33 | 3.89 | 0.24 | –0.79 | 0.67 |
| 9. Negative affect | 5.00 | 25.00 | 12.76 | 4.47 | 0.31 | –0.55 | 0.77 |
Zero-order correlation among variables under study.
| 1. Agency | 1 | 3 | |||||||
| 2. Pathway | 0.751∗∗∗ | 1 | |||||||
| 3.Satisfaction w. Family | 0.183 | 0.196* | 1 | ||||||
| 4. Satisfaction w. Friends | 0.285∗∗ | 0.368∗∗∗ | 0.318∗∗∗ | 1 | |||||
| 5. Satisfaction w. School | 0.128 | 0.194* | 0.185* | 0.444∗∗∗ | 1 | ||||
| 6. Satisfaction w. Environment | 0.201* | 0.195* | 0.183* | 0.215∗∗ | 0.204* | 1 | |||
| 7. Intrusion/Hyper-arousal | –0.147 | –0.113 | –0.115 | –0.109 | 0.133 | −0.147 | 1 | ||
| 8. Avoidance | −0.188* | –0.152 | –0.120 | –0.118 | 0.085 | −0.145 | 0.752∗∗∗ | 1 | |
| 9. Negative affect | –0.129 | −0.200* | 0.067 | 0.001 | 0.072 | −0.079 | 0.165* | −0.174* | 1 |
FIGURE 2Structural model with symptoms of trauma as target variable: standardized direct effects. Results should be read from left to right. Arrows indicate direct effects between variables; ellipses indicate latent variables; and rectangular boxes represent observed variables. Age and gender were modeled as covaryingvariables.
Analysis of variance in study variables as a function of high (H) vs. low (L) levels of agency.
| 1. Satisfaction with family | 2.20 | 6.37 | 0.001 | 1.07 |
| 2. Satisfaction with friends | 2.65 | 7.15 | 0.001 | 1.13 |
| 3. Satisfaction with school | 2.02 | 5.21 | 0.001 | 0.87 |
| 4. Satisfaction with living environment | 0.72 | 1.93 | 0.056 | 0.32 |
| 5. Intrusion | –0.69 | 0.89 | 0.377 | – |
| 6. Arousal | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.995 | – |
| 7. Negative affect | –1.37 | 2.18 | 0.031 | 0.14 |