Surveys show perceived social support enhances post-traumatic growth in adults, highlighting hope and coping strategies.
Objectives The purposes of this study were to to investigate the effect of perceived social support on post-traumatic growth in adults who have experienced trauma and to examine the mediating effects of hope and problem-focused coping in this process. Methods The study was conducted through online and offline surveys targeting 411 adult men and women aged 18 and above. A total of 411 survey responses were collected, consisting of 49 offline and 362 online responses. Among these, 28 responses where the level of pain at the time of trauma was less than 4 points and 11 insincere responses were excluded, resulting in 372 responses used for the final analysis. Data collection utilized a trauma event list questionnaire, the Korean version of the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory, Social Support Scale, the Korean version of Dispositional Hope Scale, and Problem-Focused Coping Scale. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and regression analysis. Results First, there were significant positive correlations among perceived social support, hope, problem-focused coping, and post-traumatic growth. Second, perceived social support had a direct significant effect on post-traumatic growth, with hope and problem-focused coping each mediating this relationship. Finally, the double mediation effect of hope and problem-focused coping in the relationship between perceived social support and post-traumatic growth was found to be statistically significant. Conclusions The study demonstrated that hope and problem-focused coping have individual and dual mediating effects on the relationship between perceived social support and post-traumatic growth, suggesting that these factors are important mechanisms in promoting post-traumatic growth.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chae et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: