Abstract
This study explores the psychosocial aftermath of the fire disaster by focusing on the levels of post-traumatic stress, hopelessness and perception of adequacy of resources of the affected population in the Manavgat district of Antalya province. The data of this study, which is a descriptive correlational research, were collected between 01 March-31 May 2022. The Information form, Impact of Events Scale, Beck Hopelessness Scale and Perception of Adequacy of Resource Scale were used as the data collection tools. A total of 245 individuals, predominantly farmers and with a low-income status, participated in the study. Field data revealed a high level post-traumatic stress (39.56 ± 15.71), moderate hopelessness (10.53 ± 6.83), and moderate perception of adequacy of resources (104.17 ± 32.15) among the participants. Another important finding of the study is; sociodemographic variables were significantly associated with the impact of events, hopelessness, and perception of adequacy of resources. Being female, low education and income level, being farmer, having heavily damaged house and living in a prefabricated house emerged as risk factors for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The results demonstrated a strong correlation between hopelessness, perception of adequacy of resources and post-traumatic stress. Hopelessness partially mediated the relationship between adequacy of resources and post-traumatic stress. The massive physical, economic and social losses caused by wildfire have led to persistent psychosocial problems among the affected population. The findings highlight the importance of assessing losses related to socioeconomic status and applying risk management accordingly. The data obtained in this study can shed light on the determination of risky groups after fire disaster, psychosocial interventions to be applied and the duration of interventions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The forest fires that occurred in the Mediterranean coastal region in July 2021 were recorded as the biggest fires in the history of Türkiye. The wildfire disaster not only destroyed forested areas in the region, but also spread to district/village centers, causing loss of lives and properties (Kaya Kılıç & Uğur, 2023). In the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization’s Report on Fire Disaster Damage Assessment in Antalya Province (2021), it was reported that 60.734 hectares of forest areas were burned throughout Antalya. It was determined that a total of 1151 buildings were heavily damaged in 33 neighborhoods of Manavgat district, which was mostly affected by the fire, and that 563 houses among them became unusable.
Disasters, of which fires are a type, are life events that can cause unpredictable loss of individual and social resources (Hobfoll, 2002; Delorme et al., 2004; Pérez-Sales et al., 2005; Adeagbo et al., 2016). At the individual level, disasters lead to the loss of homes, possessions, jobs and loved ones; at the societal level, they cause losses such as the interruption of services and social networks (Norris et al., 2002b; Goldmann & Galea, 2014; Morgado, 2020). Despair, hopelessness, social withdrawal, sleep disturbances, and anger are among the common health problems experienced after disaster (Ehrenreich, 2001). Furthermore, studies have shown that one of the most significant effects of natural disasters, is the development of mental health disorders (Kuo et al., 2003; Neria et al., 2008; Kristensen et al., 2009; Laugharne et al., 2011; Agyapong et al., 2018). Beyond being a mental health disorder in itself, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), one of the most common stress rhesponses to disasters (Fredman et al., 2010; Sattler et al., 2018; Cohen et al., 2019; Synder et al., 2020; Saeed & Gargano, 2022), also contributes to health problems such as anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies, poor quality of life, short- and long-term disabilities (Sareen et al., 2007; Panagioti et al., 2012; Stein et al., 2013), reinforcing feelings of hopelessness by damaging individuals’ self-esteem (Kar et al., 2004; Jenkins & Meltzer, 2012; Omori, 2012; Özdemir et al., 2015; Makwana, 2019). There is a negative relationship between hope, which is an important part of coping with mental health issues and mediates emotional well-being by providing individuals with the motivation needed to overcome their problems and disasters. Ironically, while hope plays a significant role in coping with the adverse psychological effects of disasters, disasters also contribute to hopelessness, which is seen as a state of being energyless, unable to cope with difficulties, and/or accepting that this option is not available (Carr, 2004).
Theoretical Background and Research Questions
The impact of wildfire disasters on individuals is directly related to resource loss. According to Conservation of Resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001), resource losses are the main factor in predicting the psychological impact of stressful events. Individuals, whose primary goal is survival, need to have access to various resources to achieve this goal. These resources are defined as objects (such as homes and personal belongings), conditions (such as employment and marriage), personal characteristics (such as self-esteem), and energy (such as willingness and time for activities) (Hobfoll, 1989; Sattler et al., 2018). Disasters like wildfires are often large-scale and beyond individuals’ control, leading to significant resource loss. Studies conducted after disasters have found that resource loss is the primary determinant of psychological distress. Resource losses leave the disaster survivors vulnerable, reinforce a cycle of long-term loss, and disrupt the recovery process (King et al., 1999; Norris & Kaniasty, 1996). Resource losses are also associated with PTSD, general psychological distress, and feelings of intrusiveness (Ironson et al., 1997; Benight et al., 1999; Delorme et al., 2004; Suar et al., 2016). In light of this fact, it can be stated that individuals’ post-disaster resources and/or their perception of resources, both positive and negative, diversify their disaster experiences.
When examining the impact of resource loss following a disaster, it is important to understand how resource loss affects individuals independently of other known risk factors. In this regard, important risk factors have been identified and already reported for survivors. One important risk factor is related to the degree of individuals’ exposure to stressors (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Hobfoll, 1998). Other significant risk factors are related to individuals’ socio-demographic characteristics (Brewin et al., 2000; Wong-Parodi, 2022). Gender, education level, and income play a significant role in individuals’ access to resources and services, their ability to meet their demands, and their knowledge/skills in coping with problems (Dohrenwend & Dohrenwend, 1981; Hobfoll, 1998). In this context, these variables influence how individuals are positioned in the face of disasters, their resilience, or vulnerability. Indeed, studies have shown that female gender, low education level, and low income are associated with high levels of fear, anxiety/risk perception, and likelihood of poverty, as well as low coping capacity (Eriksen et al., 2010; Shavit et al., 2013; Faas et al., 2014; Gaillard et al., 2017; Marlina et al., 2021), and they have been linked to mental health problems such as acute stress, anxiety, depression, and PTSD (Kessler et al., 1995; Breslau et al., 1997; Fullerton et al., 2004; Comer & Kendall, 2007; Bonanno et al., 2010; Furr et al., 2010; Masten & Osofsky, 2010; North et al., 2012).
Another risk factor related to the sociodemographic characteristics of individuals is young age. Elders are more vulnerable to the sudden physical effects of natural disasters compared to younger individuals; they experience higher rates of injury and mortality (Ticehurst et al., 1996; Liu et al., 2006; Cherniack, 2008; Jia et al., 2010). On the other hand, when it comes to the psychological and mental health problems after disasters, the elderly is more advantaged than the younger population (Goenjian et al., 1994; Cherniack, 2008; Rafiey et al., 2016). Unlike younger individuals who are at higher risk of acute stress disorder after a disaster (Fullerton, 2004; North et al., 2012), elders, whose resilience to stress increases due to many stressors they encounter throughout their long lives, can protect themselves from the stress (inoculation theory) and focus on more positive emotions in the face of a disaster (maturity theory) (Norris & Murrell, 1988; Thompson et al., 1993; Norris, 2002a; Wang et al., 2012). So, it can be noted that there is a significant relationship between past traumas and age with PTSD (Kessler, 1995; Breslau et al., 1997; North et al., 2012).
A negative social environment is also a risk factor related to an individual’s social characteristics in terms of post-disaster responses (Picou et al., 2004). Disasters, even if not life-threatening, disrupt the routine of daily life, leading to tension in family and community relationships and increasing social inequality. They play an active role in the emergence of mental health problems such as depression, hopelessness, PTSD, and anxiety among residents of the disaster area (Fothergill & Peek, 2004; Adams & Boscarino, 2005, 2006; Nyamadzawo et al., 2013). Moreover, prolonged disruptions in daily routines, such as extended living in tents/prefabricated housing due to shelter loss, further traumatize family members and can make it harder for them to cope with the trauma they have experienced (Miller et al., 2012).
Lastly, an individual’s social networks are also among the socio-demographic risk factors. Damage to social support networks can lead to post-disaster isolation and affect the visibility/continuity of stress response syndromes (McFarlane, 2004). Individuals whose social support networks are damaged by disasters are forced to cope with their trauma alone. This situation reinforces the feelings of helplessness and hopelessness experienced after a disaster (Norris et al., 2002b; Sattler et al., 2018; Morgado, 2020), increasing the likelihood of PTSD (Adams & Boscarino, 2005, 2006; Zhang et al., 2012). On the other hand, perceived social support is positively related to the post-disaster recovery process. After a disaster, the strong bonds individuals maintain with close family members, one of their most important social support networks, mediate recovery processes. These bonds reduce the risk of experiencing psychological distress post-trauma by providing emotional and material support, particularly exerting a protective effect against PTSD (Norris & Kaniasty, 1996; Norris et al., 2005; Wickrama & Kaspar, 2007; Chemtomb et al., 2010). Marital status is also a significant variable regarding the effects of disasters within the context of social ties. Studies shed light on the fact that the likelihood of acute stress disorder is much higher (more than double) among unmarried individuals compared to married ones (Fullerton et al., 2004). Furthermore, research indicates that the severity of PTSD experienced post-disaster is associated with marital status, with being unmarried constituting a higher risk factor (Özdemir et al., 2015).
Globally, the number of forest fires has been rising recently (Lindenmayer & Taylor, 2020). Forest fires are terrible, painful catastrophes that destroy thousands of hectares of land, kill animals, and ruin the natural world. In addition to those who are directly affected, fires also have a collective trauma effect on everyone who witnesses the devastation and losses via the media, including print, broadcast and social media. Collective trauma is the psychological reactions that affect the entire society after a traumatic event (Hirschberger, 2018). There is a need for studies that will reveal the individual and collective effects and psychosocial consequences of fires. It is considered that the results obtained from the study will provide information to mental health professionals working in the field of crisis intervention and are important in this regard. To this end, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between post-traumatic stress, hopelessness and the perception of adequacy of resources in people who experienced the fire disaster.It can be noted that there exists an extensive literature on the psychological effects of disasters. The relationship between post-disaster hopelessness and PTSD has also been reflected in the existing literature. However, studies specifically focusing on wildfire disasters are relatively limited. Furthermore, no studies have been found that explain the relationship between the perception of adequacy of resources post-disaster and hopelessness. In this context, our study will make an original contribution to the literature by reflecting on this existing relationship.
In accordance with the aim of the study, answers were sought to the following main research questions:
-
1.
What are the levels of post-traumatic stress, hopelessness, and perception of adequacy of resources in people who have experienced the fire disaster?
-
2.
Are the sociodemographic characteristics of people (age, gender, socio-economic status, education level, marital status, social support networks, ) who have experienced a fire disaster related to post-traumatic stress, hopelessness, and perception of adequacy of resources?
-
3.
Is there a relationship between the levels of post-traumatic stress, hopelessness, and perception of adequacy of resources in people who have experienced a fire disaster?
Methods
Study Design
This is a descriptive correlational study designed to determine the relationship between the post-traumatic stress, hopelessness and the adequacy of resources in people who experienced the fire disaster in Manavgat district of Antalya province.
Participants
In our study, we employed a purposive sampling method to select participants. This approach allowed us to intentionally target individuals who were most severely affected by a specific event. The collaborative effort involved social worker, the head, and officials from the social Services in the Manavgat Municipality.
To identify the participants, we considered all households registered in the Manavgat district. Within these households, we meticulously recorded the losses experienced by individuals. These losses encompassed various aspects, including residential properties, livestock, and agricultural equipment. The detailed records maintained by the municipality significantly influenced our participant selection process. Ultimately, we focused on individuals who had suffered considerably greater losses compared to others. The fundamental criterion for defining ‘most affected’ was based on the extent of loss experienced by each individual.
The fire started in Manavgat district of Antalya province on July 28, 2021 and spread to many settlements. 33 neighborhoods were affected by the fire in Manavgat. 11 neighborhoods that were determined to be most affected by the fire were included in the study. All adult individuals who lived in these neighborhoods and were directly exposed to the fire disaster and whose means of livelihood and living spaces were largely damaged constituted the population of the study.
The data of the study were collected making home visits. Selected households were identified through preliminary research field visits. The researchers visited the homes of individuals affected by the fire, administering questionnaires to those who volunteered to participate in the study and met the inclusion criteria. In this research, individuals affected by the fire who voluntarily participated were included without any sampling calculation. The first stage involved household visits, where fire-affected residents were identified and invited to participate. All households in the region affected by the fire were reached. If there was no response in one household, the next household was contacted.
The criteria for inclusion in the study were determined as having living space (home) and/or means of livelihood (agricultural lands, poultry) damaged in the fire, being aged 18 and over, and willingness to participate in the study. The data of the study were collected from 01 March 2022 to 31 May 2022.
Measures
The Information form prepared by the authors, the Impact of Events Scale, the Beck Hopelessness Scale and the Perception of Adequacy of Resource Scale were used as the data collection tools in the study.
Information Form
An information form was prepared by the researchers to collect the sociodemographic data of the participants. This information form includes questions about age, gender, educational status, marital status, income level, the nature of property lost in fire, and housing.
Impact of Events Scale
The Impact of Events Scale (IES) was prepared by Weiss (2007) based on the American Psychiatric Association’s criteria for PTSD. The scale, in which the severity of the symptoms of the people in the last 7 days is scored, consists of a total of 22 questions and 3 sub-dimensions. The first dimension is re-experiencing (questions 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 14, 16, and 20), the second dimension is avoiding (questions 5, 7, 8 11, 12, 13, 17, and 22), and the final dimensions is overstimulation (questions 4, 10, 15, 18, 19, and 21). It is scored on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = None, 4 = Very much). The lowest and highest scores on the scale are 0 and 88, respectively. It is indicated that the diagnosis of PTSD is supported in people with a score of 33 or above. High scores indicate that people experience high levels of post-traumatic stress. The Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale varies between 0.87 and 0.94, and the Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficient was found to be 0.94 in the Turkish adaptation study (Çorapçıoğlu et al., 2006) and 0.94 in this study. In this study, the impact of events was called post-traumatic stress, as used in the literature (Fredman et al., 2010; Sattler et al., 2018).
Beck Hopelessness Scale
The scale was developed by Beck et al. (1974). The scale consisting of a total of 20 questions is scored between 0 and 1. While option yes is scored 1 in items 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 20, option no is scored 1 in items 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15 and 19. The total score obtained is the “hopelessness score” of the individual. It is assumed that higher scores indicate higher hopelessness of individuals. While the scores between 15 and 20 indicate a high level of hopelessness, the scores between 9 and 14 indicate a moderate level of hopelessness, the scores between 4 and 8 indicate a low level of hopelessness, and the scores between 0 and 3 indicate the lack of hopelessness. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient of the scale was found to be 0.82 (Durak et al., 1994) and 0.85 in this study.
Perception of Adequacy of Resources Scale
The Perception of Adequacy of Resources Scale (PARS) developed by Rowland et al. (1985) aims to determine individuals’ perception of the adequacy of various resources. The scale consists of a total of 28 items and 7 sub-dimensions including physical environment, health/physical energy, time, financial, interpersonal, knowledge/skills, and social resources. The 7-point Likert scale was prepared in a way to range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The lowest and the highest scores on the scale are 28 and 196, respectively. While PARS scores range from 28 to 83, moderate PARS scores range from 84 to140 and high PARS range from 140 to196. Low scores indicate individuals’ inadequacy of physical environment, health, energy, time, financial situation, interpersonal, knowledge/skills and social resources. The Cronbach Alpha coefficient calculated for the scale was found to be 0.88 (Çopur et al., 2008) and 0.90 in this study.
Data Analysis
The data of the study were evaluated using the SPSS 23.0 (Statistical Package for Social Science) statistical package program. The data were uploaded to the SPSS program and the total scores of the individuals were calculated. In the analysis of the data, the number and percentage distributions were analyzed, and then the t test, Kruskal-Wallis H analysis, one-way ANOVA test and correlation analysis were used. Kurtosis and skewness values were examined to examine whether the variables met the normality assumption. It was observed that all values were between − 1.5 and + 1.5. This result shows that the data meets the normal distribution assumption. Finally, the analysis was performed as a result of the data set being suitable for multiple regression analysis. The results were evaluated at a confidence interval of 95% and a significance level of p < 0.05.
Ethical Considerations
Ethical approval for the study was obtained from Akdeniz University Social and Human Sciences Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee with the decision number 73 dated 16.02.2022. During the data collection, the participants were first informed about the aim of the study. Written consent was obtained from the individuals who agreed to participate in the study, and then the data collection was started.
Results
Demographic Characteristics
A total of 245 individuals consisting of 111 female and 135 male individuals participated in the study. While 49% of the participants were primary school graduates, 190 of them were married, 55 of them were single, and 71 of them were unemployed. 45.3% (n = 111) of the participants were farmers and 80% of them were in the low-income group. According to the nature of the loss, it was found out that the houses of 149 participants were severely damaged and that they lost their means of livelihood. The houses of 48 participants were mildly damaged and they lost their means of livelihood. The houses of 19.6% of the participants were not damaged and they only lost their means of livelihood. While 88 of the participants lived in their own houses, 73 of them lived in prefabricated houses, 54 of them lived in rental houses, and 30 of them lived in their relatives’ houses.
The lowest and highest values, mean and standard deviation values of the sub-dimensions and total scores of the study variables are presented in Table 1. The mean of the reliving sub-dimension was 18.91 (ss = 7.23), the average of the avoiding sub-dimension was 8.82 (ss = 3.99), the mean of the over stimulation sub-dimension was 9.95 (ss = 5.97), and the mean total score of the IES was 39.56 ± 15.71 (Table 1).
The mean of the time resource sub-dimension was 18.08 (ss = 6.52), the average of the financial resources sub-dimension was 7.68 (ss = 5.),53 the mean of the physical environment resources sub-dimension was 15.70 (ss = 0.8.49), the mean of the health/physical energy resources sub-dimension was 15.44 (ss = 8.05), the mean of the interpersonal resources sub-dimension was 17.03 (ss = 7.81), the mean of the social resources sub-dimension was 16.66 (ss = 6.27), and the mean score PARS was 104.17 ± 32.15 (Table 1).
The mean of the feelings and expectations from the future sub-dimension was 2.67 (ss = 1.99), the average of the motivation loss sub-dimension was 4.26 (ss = 2.71), the mean of the hope sub-dimension was 3.6 0(ss = 2.59), the mean score of hopelessness was 10.53 ± 6.83 (Table 1).
The relationship between the impacts of events, PARS, hopelessness levels and sociodemographic variables was evaluated. Men’s PARS and women’s IES were statistically significantly higher (p < 0.001). While the mean scores of the IES and hopelessness increased as the level of education decreased, the PARS increased as the level of education increased (p < 0.001). The mean score of the IES of married participants was statistically significantly higher compared to single participants (p < 0.001). The mean scores of the IES and hopelessness were statistically significantly high in farmers, and their PARS was low (p < 0.001). The participants with low income had higher mean scores of the IES and hopelessness and a lower mean score PARS (p < 0.001). The IES participants whose houses were heavily damaged and who lost their means of livelihood had a significantly higher mean score of the and hopelessness, and the PARS was the lowest in this group (p < 0.001). The mean scores of the IES and Hopelessness were significantly higher in those living in prefabricated houses, however, the PARS were significantly lower (p < 0.001) (Table 2).
The results revealed that the age variable was negatively correlated with the variable PARS (r = -0.394, p < 0.001) and positively correlated with the variables of hopelessness (r = 0.306, p < 0.001) and the IES (r = 0.314, p < 0.001). Furthermore, PARS was negatively correlated with the variables of hopelessness (r = -0.644, p < 0.001) and the IES (r = -0.478, p < 0.001). Finally, there was a positive correlation between variables of hopelessness and the IES (r = 0.422, p < 0.001). The results are presented in Table 3.
In the study, the mediating role of hopelessness in the relationship between the PARS and the IES was examined. To this end, a macro PROCESS Model 4 with 5000 bootstraps was used for mediation analysis developed by Hayes (2017) to be added to the SPSS program was used. When the obtained results were examined, it was observed that PARS negatively and significantly predicted the variable of hopelessness (β= − 0.64 p < 0.001). Furthermore, it was observed that hopelessness positively and significantly predicted the variable of the IES (β = 0.42 p < 0.001). Moreover, it was observed that PARS negatively and significantly predicted the variable of the IES (β= − 0.48, p < 0.001), and with the inclusion of the variable of hopelessness in the analysis in the second step, this value was still significant (β= − 0.35, p < 0.001), however, the decrease was significant CI=[(-0.11) - (-0.01)]. This result showed that hopelessness had a partial mediating role in the relationship between PARS and IES (Fig. 1).
Discussion
In this study, the relationship between post-traumatic stress, hopelessness, and resource loss among individuals who experienced the fire disaster was assessed. Literature on the effects of disasters, including forest fires, has shown that disasters can lead to mental health problems such as PTSD, depression (major depressive disorder), and anxiety, as well as loss of life and physical injuries (Doerr & Santín, 2016; Agyapong et al., 2018). Field studies conducted on major forest fires have revealed that, similar to the three-month period following the fire (Marshall et al., 2007; Belleville et al., 2019), as well as three to four years later (Bryant et al., 2014), disaster survivors expressed concerns for their own lives or the lives of their loved ones, meeting criteria for PTSD and major depression. These studies reflect that the incidence of mental health problems resulting from disasters may decrease over time but may still have a negative impact on individuals’ mental well-being.
The findings obtained from the current study, supporting the literature on the effects of fires, reflect that the Manavgat forest fire victims experienced high levels of post-traumatic stress. (39.56 ± 15.71). Risk factors for the development of PTSD following the forest fire were examined in the study, revealing that being female, having a low level of education, low income, being a farmer, having heavy damage to the residence, and living in a prefabricated house emerged as risk factors. Similarly, studies conducted in the adult population have indicated that demographic factors such as female gender, living alone, low educational level, and low socioeconomic status are risk factors for PTSD (Jones et al., 2003; Bryant et al., 2014; Agyapong et al., 2018; Silveira et al., 2021).
The literature on the mental health effects of forest fires reveals that depression and hopelessness are among the common mental health problems experienced in addition to PTSD (Hong et al., 2022). Forest fires cause loss of home-work-subsistence resources (animal and agricultural lands, plant species) (Ehrenreich, 2001; Cianconi et al., 2020), loss of social resources and lack of social support, causing disaster victims to develop hopelessness and depression (Norris et al., 2002b; Morgado, 2020). Supporting the literature, the current study revealed that people who experienced the Manavgat forest fire experienced moderate levels of hopelessness. The hopelessness was associated with the level of education. Accordingly, as the education level decreases, hopelessness increases. This relationship can be explained by the learning of coping mechanisms that occurs when education level rises. A high level of hopelessness in individuals with low income and farmers can be explained by the burning of gardens and fields and livestock that constituted their means of livelihood. The hopelessness after the forest fire was found to be highest in those whose houses were heavily damaged and those living in prefabricated houses. In most cases, severe damage to houses obliged farmers with low socioeconomic status to settle in prefabricated houses. Considering that the reconstruction continues for months, it is a predictable result that living in prefabricated houses with insufficient living space (21 m²), especially for crowded farmer families with many children, may adversely affected the people in this group and increased their feelings of hopelessness.
In this study, the PARS was found to be moderate in individuals exposed to forest fire (104.17 ± 32.15). It is indicated that PARS after a disaster is associated with psychological distress. In the study conducted by Freedy et al. (1992), it was found that adequacy of resources after negative life events negatively affected the mental health (Holahan et al., 1999). Similarly, in this study, a relationship was found between PTSD, hopelessness and PARS in individuals after the forest fire experience. Considering in terms of sociodemographic data, PARS was found to be high among men, married people and those with a high level of education, civil servants, those whose houses were not damaged and those living in their own house. On the other hand, the PARS was found to be quite low among women, farmers, those without education, those with low income, those whose houses were heavily damaged and those living in prefabricated houses. This was because the majority of people living in rural neighborhoods affected by forest fires were farmers. The fire destroyed the olive, citrus, laurel, fruit trees and greenhouse areas unique to the Mediterranean climate, which are the main livelihoods of the people of the region, and caused the death of livestock. Naturally, farmers were mostly affected by it. Nevertheless, among the people whose houses were demolished due to severe damage, those with a low income settled in a prefabricated house because they did not have another house to live in or because they could not afford to move to a rented house. Since the conditions of the prefabricated house were quite inadequate for a family to live, these people felt the PARS more. However, being educated makes it easier to get a more qualified job (Rosenbaum & Binder, 1997) and working in a public institution provides a regular income. On the other hand, the fire, that destroyed the means of livelihood of the farmers who have to maintain their lives with the income they get from the crops they plant throughout the year, caused a greater loss of resources.
The results of the study demonstrated a strong correlation between hopelessness, PARS and post-traumatic stress (Table 3). It was determined that as the PARS decreased, hopelessness increased at a high level and post-traumatic stress increased at a moderate level. In addition, as hopelessness increases, moderate post-traumatic stress also increases. Even though no study examining these three variables has been found in the literature, there are studies investigating the relationship between resource loss and post-traumatic stress (Ironson et al., 1997; Sattler et al., 2018). These studies reveal that the loss of resources after the disaster is the main determinant of post-traumatic stress and support the results obtained in our study.
In the study, we applied mediation analysis between the PARS, post-traumatic stress and hopelessness. We determined that hopelessness partially mediating role the relationship between the PARS and post-traumatic stress. This analysis reveals the impact of the research and is the strength of our study.
Based on the findings from our study, the physical, economic, and social losses resulting from a fire disaster may contribute to long-lasting mental health issues for affected individuals. It is important to evaluate the losses experienced by people in the context of their socioeconomic status and to perform risk management accordingly. The data obtained in this study can shed light on the determination of risky groups by mental health professionals after the fire disaster, the psychosocial interventions to be applied and the duration of the intervention.
Limitations
The results of this study demonstrate the relationship between post-traumatic stress, hopelessness, and resource utilization in individuals who experienced a fire disaster. Methodological limitations inherent in a cross-sectional design and variations in demographic data may limit our ability to interpret certain aspects of the data.
Implications for Social Work Practice
In recent years, disasters have become more frequent and destructive in many parts of the world, affecting in various ways not only those who are exposed but also all the people who witness. The results obtained from this study, it draws attention to the importance of the interventions that are necessary to meet immediate post-disaster needs and long-term public mental health problems. Social work is an important profession that carries out intervention and recovery efforts in the post-disaster period. It is recommended that social workers develop policies to sustain long-term psychosocial interventions for disaster survivors.
References
Adams, R. E., & Boscarino, J. A. (2005). Stress and well-being in the aftermath of the World trade center attack: The continuing effects of a community-wide disaster. Journal of Community Psychology, 33, 175–190.
Adams, R. E., & Boscarino, J. A. (2006). Predictors of PTSD and delayed PTSD after disaster: The impact of exposure and psychosocial resources. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 194(7), 485–493. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.nmd.0000228503.95503.e9.
Adeagbo, A., Daramola, A., Carim-Sanni, A., Akujobi, C., & Ukpong, C. (2016). Effects of natural disasters on social and economic well being: A study in Nigeria. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction : Ijdrr, 17, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.03.006.
Agyapong, V. I. O., Hrabok, M., Juhas, M., Omeje, J., Denga, E., & Nwaka, B. (2018). Prevalence rates and predictors of generalized anxiety disorder symptoms in residents of Fort McMurray six months after a wildfire. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9(345), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00345.
Beck, A. T., Weissman, A., Lester, D., & Trexler, L. (1974). The measurement of pessimism: The hopelessness scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(6), 861. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037562.
Belleville, G., Ouellet, M. C., & Morin, C. M. (2019). Post-traumatic stress among evacuees from the 2016 Fort McMurray wildfires: Exploration of psychological and sleep symptoms three months after the evacuation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(1604), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16091604.
Benight, C. C., Ironson, G., Klebe, K., Carver, C. S., & Burnett, K. (1999). Conservation of resources and copingself-efficiacy predicting distress following a natural disaster: Acausal model analysis where the environment meets the mind. Anxiety Stress and Coping, 12, 107–126.
Bonanno, G. A., Brewin, C. R., Kaniasty, K., & LaGreca, A. M. (2010). Weighing the costs of disaster: Consequences, risks, and resilience in individuals, families, and communities. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 11, 1–49.
Breslau, N., Davis, G. C., Andreski, P., Peterson, E. L., & Schultz, L. R. (1997). Sex differences in posttraumatic stress disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54(11), 1044–1048. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1997.01830230082012.
Brewin, C. R., Andrews, B., & Valentine, J. D. (2000). Meta-analysisof risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder in trauma-exposedadults. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 748–766.
Bryant, R. A., Waters, E., Gibbs, L., Gallagher, H. C., Pattison, P., Lusher, D., & Forbes, D. (2014). Psychological outcomes following the victorian black Saturday bushfires. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 48(7), 634–643. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867414534476.
Carr, A. (2004). Positive psychology: The science of happiness and human strengths. Routledge.
T.C. Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı Antalya İli Manavgat İlçesi Yangın Afeti Hasar Tespit Raporları 09 Ağustos 2021. [Republic of Turkey Ministry of Environment and Urbanization Antalya Province Manavgat District Fire Disaster Damage Assessment Reports].
Chemtob, C. M., Nomura, Y., Rajendran, K., Yehuda, R., Schwartz, D., & Abramovitz, R. (2010). Impact of maternal posttraumatic stress disorder and depression following exposure to the September 11 attacks on preschool children’s behavior. Child Development, 81, 1129–1141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01458.x.
Cherniack, E. P. (2008). The impact of natural disasters on the elderly. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 3(3), 133–139.
Cianconi, P., Betrò, S., & Janiri, L. (2020). The impact of climate change on mental health: A systematic descriptive review. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11(74), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00074.
Cohen, G. H., Tamrakar, S., Lowe, S., Sampson, L., Ettman, C., & Kilpatrick, D. (2019). Improved social services and the burden of post-traumatic stress disorder among economically vulnerable people after a natural disaster: A modelling study. Lancet Planet Health, 3(2), 93–101.
Comer, J. S., & Kendall, P. C. (2007). Terrorism: The psychological impact on youth. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 14(3), 179–212.
Çopur, Z., Şafak, Ş., & Terzioğlu, G. (2008). Kaynakların yeterliğinin algılanması ölçeğini uyarlama çalışması. [Adaptation of the perception of adequacy of resources scale]. H U Journal of Education, 35(35), 65–74.
Çorapçıoglu, A., Yargıç, I., Geyran, P. V., & Kocabasoglu, N. (2006). Olayların etkisi ölçeği (IES-R) Türkçe versiyonunun geçerlilik ve güvenilirligi. [Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Impact of Events Scale (IES-R)]. New Symposium Journal, 44(1): 14–22.
Delorme, D., Zinkhan, G., & Hagen, S. (2004). The process of consumer reactions to possession threats and losses in a natural disaster. Marketing Letters, 15(4), 185–199.
Doerr, S. H., & Santín, C. (2016). Global trends in wildfire and its impacts: Perceptions versus realities in a changing world. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0345.
Dohrenwend, B. P., & Dohrenwend, B. S. (1981). Socioenvi-ronmental factors, stress, and psychopathology. Part 1. Quasi-experimental evidence on the social causation-social selection issue posed by class differences. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 129–146.
Durak, A., & Palabıyıkoğlu, R. (1994). Beck umutsuzluk ölçeği geçerlilik çalışması. Kriz Dergisi, 2(2), 311–319.
Ehrenreich, J. H. (2001). Coping with disasters. A guide book to psychosocial intervention. Centre for psychology and society.
Eriksen, C., Gill, N., & Head, L. (2010). The gendered dimensions of bushfire in changing rural landscapes in Australia. Journal of Rural Studies, 26, 332–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2010.06.001.
Faas, A. J., Jones, E., Whiteford, L., Tobin, G., & Murphy, A. (2014). Gendered access to formal and informal resources in postdisaster development in the Ecuadorian Andes. Mountain Research and Development, 34(3), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.1659/mrd-journal-d-13-00100.
Fothergill, A., & Peek, L. A. (2004). Poverty and disasters in the United States: A review of recent sociological findings. Natural Hazards, 32, 89–110.
Fredman, S. J., Monson, C. M., Schumm, J. A., Adair, K. C., Taft, C. T., & Resick, P. A. (2010). Associations among disaster exposure, intimate relationship adjustment, and PTSD symptoms: Can disaster exposure enhance a relationship? Journal of Traumatic Stress, 23(4), 446–451.
Freedy, J. R., Shaw, D. L., Jarrell, M. P., & Masters, C. R. (1992). Towards an understanding of the psychological impact of natural disasters: An application of the conservation of resource model. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 5(3), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.2490050308.
Fullerton, C. S., Ursano, R. J., & Wang, L. (2004). Acute stress disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and depression in disaster or rescue workers. Am J Psychiatry 161(8):1370-6. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.161.8.1370. PMID: 15285961.
Furr, J. M., Comer, J. S., Edmunds, J. M., & Kendall, P. C. (2010). Disasters and youth: A meta-analytic examination of posttraumatic stress. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(6), 765–780.
Gaillard, J. C., Sanz, K., Balgos, B. C., Balgos, Dalisay, S. N. M., & Toelupe, V. (2017). Beyond men and women: A critical perspective on gender and disaster. Disasters, 41(3), 429–447.
Goenjian, A. K., Najarian, L. M., Pynoos, R. S., Steinberg, A. M., & Fairbanks, L. A. (1994). Posttraumatic stress disorder in elderly and younger adults after the 1988 earthquake in Armenia. Am J Psychiatry199415168959018185000, 151(6), 895–901. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.151.6.895.
Goldmann, E., & Galea, S. (2014). Mental health consequences of disasters. Annual Review of Public Health, 35, 169–183.
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation and contional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford.
Hirschberger, G. (2018). Collective trauma and the social construction of meaning. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 351992.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1998). Stress, culture, and community: The psychology and philosophy of stress. Springer.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337–421.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6(4), 307–324.
Holahan, C. J., Moos, R. H., Holahan, C. K., & Cronkite, R. C. (1999). Resource loss, resource gain, and depressive symptoms: A 10-year model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 620–629.
Hong, J. S., Hyun, S. Y., Lee, J. H., & Sim, M. (2022). Mental health effects of the Gangwon wildfires. Bmc Public Health, 22(1), 1–10.
Ironson, G., Wynings, C., Schneiderman, N., Baum, A., & Greenwood, D. (1997). Posttraumaticstress symptoms, intrusive thoughts, loss, and immune func-tion after Hurricane Andrew. Psychosomatic Medicine, 59, 128–141.
Jenkins, R., & Meltzer, H. (2012). The mental health impacts of disasters. Government Office for Science, 1–35.
Jia, Z., Tian, W., Liu, W., Cao, Y., Yan, J., & Shun, Z. (2010). Are the elderly more vulnerable to psychological impact of natural disaster? A population-based survey of adult survivors of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Bmc Public Health, 10(172), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-172.
Jones, R. T., Ribbe, D. P., Cunningham, P., & Weddle, J. D. (2003). Psychosocial correlates of wildfire disaster: Post disaster adult reactions. Fire Technology, 39(2), 103–117.
Kar, N., Jagadisha, Sharma, P., Murali, N., & Mehrotra, S. (2004). Mental health consequences of the trauma of supercyclone 1999 in Orissa. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 46, 228–237.
Kaya Kılıç, A., & Uğur, S. B. (2023). Psiko-sosyal ve ekonomik kayıplarıyla Manavgat yangını. Sosyal, Beşeri ve İdari Bilimler Alanında Uluslararası Araştırmalar XIX, 89102. In Turkish.
Kessler, R. C., Sonnega, A., Bromet, E., Hughes, M., & Nelson, C. (1995). Posttraumatic stress disorder in the National Comorbidity Study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 52, 1048–1060.
King, D. W., King, L. A., Foy, D. W., Keane, T. M., & Fairbank, J. A. (1999). Posttraumatic stress disorder in a national sample of female and male Vietnam veterans: Risk factors, war-zone stressors, and resilience-recovery variables. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108, 164–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021843X.108.1.164.
Kristensen, P., Weisæth, L., & Heir, T. (2009). Psychiatric disorders among disaster bereaved: An interview study of individuals directly or not directly exposed to the 2004 tsunami. Depression & Anxiety, 26(12), 1127–1133. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20625.
Kuo, C. J., Tang, H. S., & Tsay, C. J. (2003). Prevalence of psychiatric disorders among bereaved survivors of a disastrous earthquake in Taiwan. Psychiatric Services (Washington, D. C.), 54, 249–251.
Laugharne, J., de Watt, G. V., & Janca, A. (2011). After the fire: The mental health consequences of fire disasters. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 24, 72–77. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e32833f5e4e.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
Lindenmayer, D. B., & Taylor, C. (2020). New spatial analyses of Australian wildfires highlight the need for new fire, resource, and conservation policies. Pnas, 117(22), 12481–12485. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002269117.
Liu, A., Tan, H., Zhou, J., Li, S., & Wen, S. W. (2006). An epidemiologic study of posttraumatic stress disorder in flood victims in Hunan China. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 51(6), 350–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370605100603.
Makwana, N. (2019). Disaster and its impact on mental health: A narrative review. J Family Med Prim Care, 8(10), 3090–3095.
Marlina, S., Lautt, B. S., Usup, A., & Sunaryati, R. (2021). Gender capability in facing the reality of the impact of forest fires in Central Kalimantan. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 18(4), 4844–4848.
Marshall, G. N., Schell, T. L., Elliott, M. N., Rayburn, N. R., & Jaycox, L. H. (2007). Psychiatric disorders among adults seeking emergency disaster assistance after a wildland-urban interface fire. Psychiatric Services, 58(4), 509–514.
Masten, A. S., & Osofsky, J. D. (2010). Disasters and their impact on child development: Introduction to the special section. Child Development, 81(4), 1029–1039.
McFarlane, A. (Ed.). (2004). Assessing PTSD and comorbidity: Issues in differential diagnosis. Broken spirits. Routledge.
Miller, P. A., Roberts, N. A., Zamora, A. D., Weber, D. J., & Robles, E. (2012). Families coping with natural disasters: Lessons from wildfires and tornados. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 9(4), 314–336.
Morgado, A. M. (2020). Disasters, individuals, and communities: Can positive psychology contribute to community development after disaster? Community Development, 51(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2020.1714685.
Neria, Y., Olfson, M., & Gameroff, M. J. (2008). The mental health consequences of disaster-related loss: Findings from primary care one year after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Psychiatry, 71, 339–348.
Norris, F. H., & Kaniasty, K. (1996). Received and perceived social support in times of stress: A test of the social support deterioration deterrence model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 498–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.498.
Norris, F. H., & Murrell, S. A. (1988). Prior experience as a moderator of disaster impact on anxiety symptoms in older adults. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16(5), 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00930020.
Norris, F. H., Kaniasty, K., & Conrad, M. L. (2002a). Placing age differences in cultural context: A comparison of the effects of age on PTSD after disasters in the United States, Mexico, and Poland. Journal of Clinical Geropsychology, 8, 153–173. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015940126474.
Norris, F., Friedman, M. J., Watson, P. J., Byrne, C., & Kaniasty, K. (2002b). 60,000 disaster victims speak: Part I. An empirical review of the empirical literature: 1981–2001. Psychiatry, 65(3), 207–239.
Norris, F. H., Baker, C., Murphy, A., & Kaniasty, K. (2005). Social support mobilization and deteriora-tion after Mexico’s 1999 flood: Effects of context, gender, and time. American Journal of CommunityPsychology, 36(1–2), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-005-6230-9.
North, C. S., Oliver, J., & Pandya (2012). Examining a comprehensive model of disaster-related posttraumatic stress disorder in systematically studied survivors of 10 disasters. American Journal of Public Health, 102(10), e40–e48. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300689.
Nyamadzawo, G., Gwenzi, W., Kanda, A., Kundhlande, A., & Masona, C. (2013). Understanding the causes, socio-economic and environmental impacts, and management of veld fires in tropical Zimbabwe. Fire Science Reviews, 2(2), 1–13.
Omori, T. (2012). The recurring natural disaster and the problem of PTSD among older adults: Research on the residents in Tsubota district after nine years from the eruption of Miyake Island’s Oyama in 2000. Yokohama Journal of Social Sciences, 17(3), 63–72.
Özdemir, O., Boysan, M., Özdemir, P. G., & Yılmaz, E. (2015). Relationships between posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), dissociation, quality of life, hopelessness, and suicidal ideation among earthquake survivors. Psychiatry Research, 228(3), 598–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2015.05.045.
Panagioti, M., Gooding, P. A., & Tarrier, N. (2012). A meta-analysis of the association between posttraumatic stress disorder and suicidality: The role of comorbid depression. Compr Psychiatry 53(7): 915 – 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2012.02.009. Epub 2012 Apr 5. PMID: 22483367.
Pérez-Sales, P., Cervellón, P., Vázquez, C., Vidales, D., & Gaborit, M. (2005). Post-traumatic factors and resilience: The role of shelter management and survivors’ attitudes after the earthquakes in El Salvador (2001). Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 15, 368–382. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.827.
Picou, J. S., Marshall, B. K., & Gill, D. A. (2004). Disaster, litigation and the corrosive community. Social Forces, 82, 1493–1522.
Rafiey, H., Abolfathi, Y., Momtaz, Alipour, F., & Haron, S. A. (2016). Are older people more vulnerable to long-term impacts of disasters? Clinical Interventions in Aging, 11, 1791–1795.
Rosenbaum, J. E., & Binder, A. (1997). Do employers really need more educated youth? Sociology of Education, 68–85.
Rowland, V. T., Dodder, R. A., & Nickols, S. (1985). Perceived adequacy of resources: Development of a scale. Home Economics Research Journal, 14(2), 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077727X8501400205.
Saeed, S. Y., & Gargano, S. P. (2022). Natural disasters and mental health. International Review of Psychiatry, 34(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2022.2037524.
Sareen, J., Cox, B. J., Stein, M. B., & Asmundson, G. J. (2007). Physical and mental comorbidity, disability, and suicidal behavior associated with posttraumatic stress disorder in a large community sample. Psychosomatic Medicine, 69(3), 242–248. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0b013e31803146d8Epub 2007 Mar 30. PMID: 17401056.
Sattler, D. N., Claramita, M., & Muskavage, B. (2018). Natural disasters in Indonesia: Relationships among posttraumatic stress, resource loss, depression, social support, and posttraumatic growth. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 23(5), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/15325024.2017.1415740.
Shavit, T., Shahrabani, S., Benzion, U., & Rosenboim, M. (2013). The effect of a forest fire disaster on emotions and perceptions of risk: A field study after the Carmel fire. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 129–135.
Silveira, S., Kornbluh, M., Withers, M. C., Grennan, G., Ramanathan, V., & Mishra, J. (2021). Chronic mental health sequelae of climate change extremes: A case study of the deadliest Californian wildfire. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(1487), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041487.
Stein, D. J., Koenen, K. C., Friedman, M. J., & Kessler, R. C. (2013). Dissociation in posttraumatic stress disorder: Evidence from the world mental health surveys. Biological Psychiatry, 73(4), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.08.022.
Suar, D., Das, S. S., Alat, P., & Suar, J. (2016). Exposure, resource loss, and posttsunami trauma. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 21(5), 421–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/15325024.2015.1110457.
Synder, J. D., Boan, D., Aten, J. D., Davis, E. B., Van Grinsven, L., Liu, T., & Worthington, E. L. (2020). Resource loss and stress outcomes in a setting of chronic conflict: The conservation of resources theory in the Eastern Congo. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 33(3), 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22448.
Thompson, M. P., Norris, F. H., & Hanacek, B. (1993). Age differences in the psychological consequences of Hurricane Hugo. Psychology and Aging, 8(4), 606–616. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.8.4.606.
Ticehurst, S., Webster, R. A., Carr, V. J., & Lewin, T. J. (1996). The psychosocial impact of an earthquake on the elderly. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 11(11), 943–951. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1166(199611)11:11%3C943::AID-GPS412%3E3.0.CO;2-B.
Wang, T., Yang, H., & Han, B. (2012). A follow up study on the elderly survivors’ mental health two years after the Wenchuan earthquake. International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation, 6(5), 872–880.
Weiss, D. S. (2007). The impact of event scale: Revised. Cross-cultural assessment of psychological trauma and PTSD. Springer.
Wickrama, K. A., & Kaspar, V. (2007). Family context of mental health risk in Tsunami-exposed adolescents: Findings from a pilot study in Sri Lanka. Social Science and Medicine, 64, 713–723.
Wong-Parodi, G. (2022). Support for public safety power shutoffs in California: Wildfire-related perceived exposure and negative outcomes, prior and current health, risk appraisal and worry. Energy Research & Social Science, 88, 102495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102495.
Zhang, Z., Wang, W., Shi, Z., Wang, L., & Zhang, J. (2012). Mental health problems among the survivors in the hard-hit areas of the Yushu earthquake. Plos One, 7(10), e46449.
Funding
Open access funding provided by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kaya Kılıç, A., Uğur, S.B. & Bademli, K. The Relationship Between Post-Traumatic Stress, Hopelessness and Resources Adequacy in Fire Disaster Survivors: A Mediation Analysis. Clin Soc Work J (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-024-00956-9
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-024-00956-9