Published In

Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice And Policy

Document Type

Post-Print

Publication Date

2-2019

Subjects

Traumatism -- Treatment, Psychic trauma, Organizational change, Trauma informed care -- Implementation

Abstract

Objective: Organizations are identifying trauma-informed care (TIC) as a priority yet implementation is slow. Research suggests commitment to a change effort is an important predictor for change behavior; however, there is little theoretical or empirical evidence exploring commitment to TIC. This study examines the variables that predict affective commitment to TIC including foundational knowledge, principal support, self-efficacy, and beliefs about trauma. Does foundational knowledge independently predict affective commitment to TIC or is this relationship mediated by other variables? Method: Data were collected from 118 participants working in human services, using cross-sectional survey design. Participants completed self-report measures of affective commitment to TIC, foundational knowledge, principal support, self-efficacy, and beliefs about trauma. It was hypothesized that the relationship between foundational knowledge and affective commitment to TIC would be mediated through self-efficacy and beliefs about trauma, but not through principal support. Structural equation modeling was used to test the direct and indirect effects. Results: The findings support a partially mediated model with a direct effect between foundational knowledge and affective commitment to TIC (explaining 5% of the variance in affective commitment) and indirect effects between foundational knowledge and affective commitment through principal support, TIC self-efficacy, and beliefs about trauma. Altogether, the model explained 65% of the variance in affective commitment to TIC. Conclusion: This study contributes to both the organizational change literature and the growing TIC literature. As individuals and organizations work to implement TIC, these findings provide theoretical and practical implications for the field, addressing an important gap in research.

Description

This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice And Policy. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice And Policy, [11, 2, (2-2019)] 10.1037/tra0000411

DOI

10.1037/tra0000411

Persistent Identifier

https://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/27560

Download

Included in

Social Work Commons

Share

COinS