Starting from the challenge offered by the authors of the post-traumatic growth (PTG) construct (Tedeschi & Calhoun,), this paper aims to explore the existence of different linguistic profiles of cognitive and emotional processes in PTG narratives. The autobiographical narratives of 40 cancer patients were analysed for both PTG and linguistic indicators of emotions and cognitive processes. PTG was operationalised as the presence of redemption sequences (McAdams,). The emotional and cognitive linguistic indicators were analysed by the LIWC program (Pennebaker & Francis,). All the narratives included PTG (M = 3.55, SD = 1.91). Three clusters of linguistic profiles were retained (60%–79% of variance explained): “disengagement”, “assimilative” and “accommodative”. These clusters differed significantly by PTG (F = 9.70, p <.000, η2 =.34). Given the limitations of the study, the results highlight the importance of the linguistic approach to a deeper understanding of PTG and to tailored pathways of its promotion.
Scrignaro, M., Marini, E., Magrin, M., Borreani, C. (2018). Emotive and cognitive processes in cancer patients: linguistic profiles of post-traumatic growth. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, 27(1) [10.1111/ecc.12620].
Emotive and cognitive processes in cancer patients: linguistic profiles of post-traumatic growth
SCRIGNARO, MARTA
;MARINI, EMANUELA;MAGRIN, MARIA ELENA;
2018
Abstract
Starting from the challenge offered by the authors of the post-traumatic growth (PTG) construct (Tedeschi & Calhoun,), this paper aims to explore the existence of different linguistic profiles of cognitive and emotional processes in PTG narratives. The autobiographical narratives of 40 cancer patients were analysed for both PTG and linguistic indicators of emotions and cognitive processes. PTG was operationalised as the presence of redemption sequences (McAdams,). The emotional and cognitive linguistic indicators were analysed by the LIWC program (Pennebaker & Francis,). All the narratives included PTG (M = 3.55, SD = 1.91). Three clusters of linguistic profiles were retained (60%–79% of variance explained): “disengagement”, “assimilative” and “accommodative”. These clusters differed significantly by PTG (F = 9.70, p <.000, η2 =.34). Given the limitations of the study, the results highlight the importance of the linguistic approach to a deeper understanding of PTG and to tailored pathways of its promotion.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
ecc.12620.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia di allegato:
Publisher’s Version (Version of Record, VoR)
Dimensione
405.67 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
405.67 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.