Traumatic Experiences Yield Changes in the Situation Experience

Much of the research on post-traumatic growth posits that traumatic events may result in positive personality changes in a number of domains. We propose that this growth may occur, at least in part, because of changes in situations that one experiences following a traumatic event. Exposure to these new situations may be directly responsible for changes in individual behaviour and personality. We explore how new situations may be relevant to the study of post-traumatic growth and recommend that future research consider differences in experienced situations. Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology What are the consequences of experiencing a traumatic event? According to Jayawickreme and Blackie (J&B), there is some evidence to suggest that traumatic life events are related to subsequent changes in personality, including traits and behaviour. However, post-traumatic growth may also result in changes in a different part of the ‘personality triad’ (Funder, 2006)—situations. Although we agree with J&B that more research is needed, such as prominent theories on this topic, we suspect that traumatic events lead to changes via internal personality processes (e.g. reappraisal, rumination, meaning-making). However, we also suspect that traumatic life events lead to subsequent changes in situation experiences, and situations matter (Funder & Colvin, 1991; Furr & Funder, 2004; Richard, Bond, & Stokes-Zoota, 2003; Ross & Nisbett, 1991; Sherman, Nave, & Funder, 2010, 2012; Sommers, 2011). That is, the situations we experience day-in and dayout, day after day, affect who we are. For example, an abundance of evidence suggests that personality changes with age, and such age-related changes are suspected to be, in part, due to changes in daily situation experiences (e.g. retirement; Lucas & Donnellan, 2011; Soto, John, Gosling, & Potter, 2011; Srivastava et al., 2003). Thus, it seems hardly a far stretch to think that experience of a traumatic event could lead to a plethora of changes in daily situation experiences, ultimately yielding changes in behaviour and personality. The target article hints at this possible process: ‘... consider the individual who has lost his or her child to leukemia, and since has committed himself or herself to raising awareness and funds for this worthy cause’ (p. 9). While such a traumatic event probably leads to changes in the way the parent processes information in the social world, it also affects the kinds of situations this person is likely to encounter. For instance, when the parent wakes up in the morning, the child is no longer there to be greeted for breakfast. They can no longer play together outside on sunny weekends. In other words, there is now a discrepancy between the daily events (i.e. situations) that would (or could) have happened, and those that are now possible. Moreover, the situations the parent would (or could) have experienced are now replaced by new situations, and, as implied in J&B’s example, the parent is now likely to spend that time organizing and attending fundraisers, speaking about the experience to others and perhaps even in hospital cancer wards. It is wholly possible that these experiences themselves lead to changes in the five domains in which post-traumatic growth is likely to occur (J&B; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). After the death of a child, for example, a parent may experience new situations that are a continuous reminder of the loss. Such situations can be challenging, and overcoming those challenges should yield increased personal strength. Because others recognize the challenges resulting from a traumatic event, the parent is also more likely to experience situations in which he or she is receiving social support. Such experiences of social support likely strengthen interpersonal relationships with close others (e.g. family, friends, support groups, other survivors). Alternatively, the parent may seek out situations that reduce reminders of the loss. Indeed, after experiencing a traumatic event, one may wish to ‘move on with his or her life’, by literally moving to a new location or exploring new opportunities, which both provide different possibilities for one’s life. Further, it is apparent that experiencing situations where death and sickness are salient can affect one’s spirituality (or lack thereof). Situations that remind individuals of their mortality (e.g. hospitals, funeral homes) may result in strengthened or new religious beliefs or spirituality. Lastly, traumatic events can introduce situations to foster a newfound appreciation for life. A leukaemia patient finally being released from the hospital, for example, must no longer deal with painful chemotherapy or tedious visits from doctors and nurses. Thus, in this sense, the removal of certain (unpleasant) situationsmay be related to an individual’s greater appreciation for life. These ongoing changes in one’s daily situations may contribute to the overall process of post-traumatic growth. How could such processes be studied? First, one would need a tool to measure situations. Second, one would need a method for assessing situations experienced both prior to and after a traumatic event. The Riverside Situational Q-Sort (Wagerman & Funder, 2009; Sherman et al., 2010) and its recently identified eight major dimensions (Rauthmann et al., in press) provide such a tool. In addition, experience sampling methods seem ideal for assessing real-life situations experience before and after a traumatic event. Thus, by employing a brief measurement instrument for assessing situations (e.g. Rauthmann & Sherman, under review) with a methodology to measure situations in real-time, perhaps we can begin to investigate the kinds of situations experienced both before and after traumatic events. Discussion 339 Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology Eur. J. Pers. 28: 332–361 (2014)