Table 2.
Self-report and narrative memory characteristics
| Variable | Trauma-exposed, PTSD | Trauma-exposed, Non-PTSD |
Non trauma-exposed | Statistical test for group | Effect size (ξ) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mdn | IQR | N | Mdn | IQR | N | Mdn | IQR | N | |||
| Self-reported trauma memory | |||||||||||
| Memory quality (TMQQ) | 34 | 7.50 | 29 | 17 | 6.67 | 40 | - | - | - | Yt = -12.19, p = < 0.001* | 0.95 |
| Memory centrality (CCES) | 2.90 | 1.21 | 29 | 1.29 | 0.71 | 39 | - | - | - | Yt = -7.77, p = < 0.001* | 0.88 |
| Data driven processing (CDDPQ) | 23.50 | 9 | 28 | 13 | 11 | 39 | - | - | - | Yt = -5.18, p = < 0.001* | 0.80 |
| Trauma event narrative | |||||||||||
| Disorganisation | − 0.25 | 1.13 | 27 | − 0.24 | 1.04 | 38 | Yt = -0.37, p = .71 | 0.08 | |||
| Incoherence | 3 | 3 | 27 | 2 | 2 | 37 | - | - | - | Yt = -1.98, p = .04 | 0.36 |
| Sensations | 4.80 | 5.23 | 27 | 2.66 | 36 | - | - | - | Yt =-3.15, p = .003* | 0.50 | |
| Negative feelings | 1.43 | 4.20 | 27 | 1.45 | 3.03 | 35 | - | - | - | Yt = -1.06, p = .28 | 0.21 |
| Context | 1 | 1 | 27 | 1 | 0.50 | 37 | - | - | - | U = 492, p = .91 | − .011 |
| Theme | 1 | 1 | 27 | 2 | 2 | 37 | - | - | - | U = 287.50, p = .002* | .381 |
| Negative event narrative | |||||||||||
| Disorganisation | − 0.13 | 1.23 | 27 | − 0.27 | 1.43 | 37 | − 0.41 | 1.19 | 36 | Ft =1.67, p = .19 | 0.25 |
| Incoherence | 4 | 2 | 27 | 3 | 2 | 36 | 3 | 1.75 | 36 | Ft =4.05, p = .04 | 0.39 |
| Sensations | 0 | 0 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 0 | 0.89 | 36 | H(2) = 1.66, p = .44 | .052 |
| Negative feelings | 2.50 | 6.25 | 27 | 2.91 | 4.31 | 36 | 4.26 | 6.01 | 36 | Ft =0.55, p = .55 | 0.16 |
| Context | 1 | 0 | 27 | 1 | 1 | 36 | 1 | 0 | 36 | H(2) = 0.13, p = .94 | − .022 |
| Theme | 1 | 1 | 27 | 2 | 1 | 35 | 2 | 1 | 36 | H(2) = 2.60, p = .27 | .012 |
Note: CCES = Child Centrality of Events Scale, CDDPQ = Child Data Driven Processing Questionnaire, IQR = interquartile range, Mdn = median, TMQQ = Trauma Memory Quality Questionnaire
*Indicates significance at Holm-Bonferroni corrected alpha level. 1 Not possible to compute robust statistics for these variables, Mann-Whitney U test used as non-parametric alternative and effect size, r, interpreted as small 0.10, medium 0.25, large ≥ 0.40 (Rosenthal & Rosnow, 1991). 2 Not possible to compute robust statistics for these variables, Kruskal-Wallis test used as non-parametric alternative. Effect size, ηp2,Interpreted as small 0.01-0.06, medium 0.06-0.14, large ≥ 0.14 (Tomczak & Tomczak, 2014). ab Indicates significant post-hoc group differences.