Debriefing

Paper Summary:

This paper evaluates the statistical significance and effectiveness of debriefing techniques, often called psychological debriefing (PD), in the treatment and potential alleviation of post traumatic stress disorders (PSTD) in victims of violent crime, traumatic accidents, and those healthcare and law enforcement professionals whose professions include frequent and at times traumatic involvement with crime and accident victims. The paper states that the research community is split on the effectiveness of PD as a strategy for alleviating long-term implications of PSTD and related mental illnesses. The paper analyzes the variations in methodology, sample size, study design, questionnaire design and selection of statistical analysis techniques.

Outline:
Summary
Analyzing Arguments against PD: A Statistical Perspective
Arguments for PD: A Statistical Perspective

From the Paper:

"Chemtob, Tomas, Law and Cremniter (1997) completed PD-based research of Hurricane Iniki survivors in Hawaii. The methodology centered on creating two groups, using a test-retest methodology to isolate the effects of the IES scale on groups 1 and 2. This sampling methodology was completed specifically to allow for pretest IES scores to be completed on group 1 respondents, while post-test scores were captured from group 2. The sampling frame included members of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Despite there being potential biases in the sampling methodology, the results showed that within-group treatment was highly predicted at the 99% CI with an F Score of 21.13, showing that intragroup effects of PD strategies were highly effective. ANOVA was later used to evaluate reductions in IES scores, with PD Strategies reducing intervention (F-test value of 9.49) and intrusion at an F-test value of 18.18 with a very high level of statistical significance of 99+% CI. The statistically significant drop in aggregate IES scores is also significant at the 99% CI, dropping the aggregate scores fro those most at risk from 32.3 to 27.2."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Bisson, Jenkins, Alexander and Bannister (1997). Randomized controller trial of psychological debriefing for victims of acute burn trauma. British Journal of Psychiatry. Pages 78 - 81.
• Campfield and Hills (2001). Effect of Timing of Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD) on Posttraumatic Symptoms. Journal of Traumatic Stress. Volume 14, No. 2, 2001. Pages 327 - 340.
• Carlier, V.E., Voerman, A.E., Gersons, B.P.R. (2000). The influence of occupational debriefing on post-traumatic stress symptomatology in traumatized police officers. British Journal of Medical Psychology (2000), 73, 87-98 q 2000 The British Psychological Society
• Chemtob, Tomas, Law and Cremniter (1997). Post disaster Psychosocial Intervention: A Field Study of the Impact of Debriefing on Psychological Distress. American Journal of Psychiatry. March, 1997.
• Conlin, Fahy and Conroy (1998). PTSD in Ambulant RTA Victims: A randomized Controller Trial of Debriefing. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 37-44, 1999 Copyright O 1998 Elsevier Science Inc.

More papers on Debriefing:

• Article Review # 107376 : "Debriefing"
• Essay # 94612 : "Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD)"
• Research Paper # 119899 : "The Effects of Confidence on Social Facilitation"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: