Using Methods from Personality Psychology to Study Post-Traumatic Growth

This chapter discusses methodological approaches for examining the causality, accuracy, stability, and mechanisms of short-term adversity-driven change in samples drawn from different populations, each highly likely to be exposed to different forms of challenge and failure. This methodological work builds on Frazier et al.’s (2009) groundbreaking longitudinal study. The authors discuss the advantages of using longitudinal multimethod measurement burst designs and a profile approach utilizing a round-robin design, as well as a qualitative assessment. Each methodology promises to address novel questions concerning the perception, meta-perception, and development of character following challenge and failure. The chapter also examines individual difference factors, such as social support and cumulative life adversity, which may moderate this relationship. Given that participants from different populations likely differ in the amount of cumulative adversity they have experienced, the authors also examine the possibilities and limitations of lifetime adversity in acting as a catalyst for subsequent growth.