resilience, proactive resilience, reactive resilience, disaster mental health responders, critical incident stress management training
Previous research by Burnett, Pichot, and Bailey (2019) found support for several innate well-being and behavioral action variables that contribute to Everly’s Psychological Body Armor’s (PBA) two unique interacting human protective pathways (proactive and reactive resilience) among a non-disaster mental health response population. However, research is limited regarding the unique proactive and reactive pathway variables that contribute to resilience capacity among trained disaster mental health responders. Participants (N = 63) were novice and experienced disaster mental health responders who attended a Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) training conference in Michigan that completed the same 14 measures used in the original Burnett, Pichot, and Bailey study. Similar to the Burnett, Pichot, and Bailey study, hierarchical regression analyses revealed that for the proactive pathway, self-acceptance and subjective happiness were significant unique predictors for resilience capacity, while psychological distress and perceived stress were significant unique predictors for the reactive pathway. A qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) found that all but one of the cases met the observation criteria for having high resilience. However, when the dataset for this study was combined with the original study (NCombined = 265), QCA revealed that overall; having professional CISM training contributed more to strong resilience making the proactive pathway irrelevant.
Crisis, Stress, and Human Resilience: An International Journal
Burnett, Harvey J.; Bailey, Karl G. D.; and Pichot, Rachelle E., "A Brief Report: Preliminary Findings for Pathways to Resilience among Critical Incident Stress Management Responders" (2020). Faculty Publications. 3041.
Open access article retrieved July 21, 2021 from https://www.crisisjournal.org/article/13327