Collective Coping (continued) Class 17

Quake Study Survey Locations

Timeline of Quake Study Q WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK --- WEEK --- WEEK --- WEEK

Quake Study Method Sample size:789 residents (SF, Sac, S. Cal, Dallas) Data gathering method: Phone survey Random digit dialing Calls made 6:30 – 9:30, weeknights only Survey lasts 10 minutes

Survey Content Communication: Thinking, talking, listening Emotional reactions Physical symptoms Coping tactics : praying, joking, drinking

Rates of Talking and Thinking Following the Loma Prieta Earthquake: Bay Area Only

“Thank you for not sharing your earthquake experience with me” T-shirts in Palo Alto during weeks 3-6 after the quake

Percent Reporting an Earthquake-Related Dream, SF vs. Other Locations

Percent Reporting an Argument with Family or Co-Workers During the Prior Week

Percentage Change in Aggravated Assaults From Year Before Quake to Year After Quake

Rates of Quake Related Joking

A Need to Be Shaken and Stirred? “But deep in my heart I know not that a major disaster would be deliverance from my drab, wretched life – salvation from the old week-by-week, a chance for two-bit heroics blown up on the front page …. I’ve talked to others, and I’m not alone. Maybe we crave a chance to be stouthearted for once and have a real situation to cope with.” Michael Hood, NPR Reporter Commenting on minor quake in Seattle, WA 05/09/96

The Three Stage Model of Collective Coping

Persian Gulf War I US soldiers in harms way Experts predict 1000s of US casualties Fears of nuclear weapons, poison gas Fears of terrorism at home Yellow ribbons, prayer sessions Media barrage of war-relate stories

Persian Gulf War Study Survey nearly identical to that used in Quake Study Participants contacted randomly All participants were Dallas, TX residents No “comparison sample” possible

Rates and Talking and Thinking Following the Persian Gulf War

Rates of Event-Related Dreaming, Following the Quake and Following the War

Rate of Increased Aggravated Assaults, Dallas, 1991 (War) vs (Pre-War)

Implications of Collective Coping Research 1.Coping appears to occur in a three-stage manner 1.Emergency 2.Inhibition 3.Recovery 2.Public safety should be on especial alert during inhibition stage 3.Emotions are negotiated events; we need to share the burden of disclosure and listening.

Why Does Coping Require Disclosure? The Emotional Broadcaster Theory NOTE: THIS AND REMAINING SLIDES NOT RELEVANT FOR FALL 2010 CLASS

Daily Talking Following the Loma Prieta Earthquake and the Persian Gulf War Pennebaker & Harber, 1993

Intra-Personal Reasons to Disclose Schachter Anxiety and Affiliation Studies a. Clarify causes of distress b. Validate one's own reactions Sympathetic Listening as Social Support a. Making sense of Trauma b. Perspective c. Insight d. Belongingness, acceptance Failure to Disclose can be a Health Risk a. Prolonged suppression → chronic stress. b. Disclosure reduces illness.

The Emotional Broadcaster Theory Proximal need to disclose  Intra-psychic benefits Distal result of disclosure  Information transfer

Personal News is Widely Broadcasted Disclose copiously after major events Disclose with minimal prompting Disclose when asked not to do so Disclose unconsciously Disclose against self-interest Disclosure is cross-cultural Disclosure is ancient

Well-Told Disclosures are the Most Therapeutic Disclosures that create “movies” in listeners minds predict success in therapy (Bucci, 1997) Disclosures with best narrative structure advance illness recovery (Harber & Pennebaker, 1992) Disclosures Benefit Listeners Testimony therapy (Agger & Jensen 1990) Gossip is informative (Baumeister et al., 2004)

Emotions Propel Disclosures “The Social Telegraph”

The Morgue Study Harber, K.D & Cohen, D., Jou. Language and Soc. Psych, 2005 Participants: 33 undergrads (55% female) Event: Field trip to UM hospital morgue Self-reported reactions: 3 days after morgue visit Story tracking exercise

Marlow (M) told 3 Ilana (F) told 2 Deb (F) told 0 Max (M) told 1 Gabe (M) told 0 Andrea (F) told 1 Hannah (F ) told 1 Maja (F ) told 0 Lew (M) told 1 Primary Sharing Secondary Sharing Tertiary Sharing

Story Sharing Following Morgue Field Trip Primary Sharing (Sharing by students) ( n = 33) Secondary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends) ( n = 32) Tertiary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends’ Friends) ( n = 27) Number/rate of sharing (97%) (82%) (48%) Mean contacts per sharer 6.21 (4.06) 1.46 (1.21) 1.26 ( 1.20) Total no. contacts this level Total hearing about event: ≈ 881

Students’ Emotional Reactions and Story Sharing Primary Sharing (Sharing by students) ( n = 33) Secondary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends) ( n = 32) Tertiary Sharing (Sharing by students’ Friends’ Friends) ( n = 26) Students’ reactions.73**.24.46* Students’ disclosures.56**.61** Note: Students’ disclosures represent proxy index of emotional reaction.

No se vive sin amour. Class 18: Social Support One cannot live without love

What is Social Support? Knowledge that one is not alone when facing stressors.

Harlow "Wire Mother" Studies

Rene' Spitz Foundling Home Study

DEPRIVATION DWARFISM

What Are Types of Social Support? Emotional Informational InstrumentalTangible EmotionalInformationalInstrumentalTangible DisclosureHow to get helpTransportationProvide funds BelongingNature of problemHelp cleanProvide materials Worthiness Affection Poss. solutionsTrack meds.

Social Support as Non-Specific Resistance Stress: Non-specific health threat. Why? Effects cardiovascular, respiratory, digestive, emotional health. Social Support: Non-specific resistance factor. Why? Effects cardiovascular, respiratory, digestive, emotional health.

Social Support and Biomedical Model of Health Social support challenges the bio-med model. Why? “Over the last 150 years of medical research from Pasteur, Koch onward, research has proceeded successfully along lines of identifying one cause of one disease with the theory of disease specificity being one of the major advances in our thinking over the last century.” Biomed model predicts 1 cause for illness, specific to illness. Social support indicates multiple, general causes for specific illness.

Prospective Studies on Social Support and Health What is a " prospective study "? Sample is identified first, then outcomes measured later on. Versus Retrospective Study, where outcomes identified first, then characteristics of sample identified. Which method is more reliable and why? Prospective : 1. Prospective, so not biased by recall. 2. Population based, not based on volunteers but on large population. 3. Effects are of large magnitude, both clinically and statistically significant.

Community Based Studies, Alameda County: Men and women w/o support were 1.9 to 3.1 times more likely to die in 9 year follow up. What was main cause of death? ___ Heart Disease ___ Stroke ___ Cancer ___ Respiratory ___ Gastrointestinal X X X X X Problems with this study: Doesn't account for pre-study illness N. Karelia Study: Focuses only on CHD Admits only patients with pre-existing CHD/CHD risks Isolated men (not women) higher CHD mortality

12 Additional Studies Associate Social Isolation with Mortality Emotional Isolation Pre-MI, Mortality Post Myocardial Infarction (MI)