Study Participants
Within two weeks of the aviation disaster, 526 residents were randomly recruited online from five cities in the Guangxi Province. Before the questionnaire survey, the investigators informed the participants about the contents of the survey and obtained their consent. All participants were required to maintain their anonymity to protect their privacy. This study was reviewed and approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Yibin University, China.
After deleting waste papers, such as consistent responses and missing more answers, 466 valid questionnaires were obtained, with an effective rate of 88.59%. Among them were 150 men (32.2%) and 316 women (67.8%). The participants were mainly 18–27 years old, accounting for 67.4% of the participants.
Measuring Instrument
Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Self-rating Scale. The Chinese version of the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Self-Rating Scale (The PTSD Checklist, PCL-C) was revised and tested (Shi et al., 2005). The scale comprises four factors, including recurrent responses to traumatic experiences, avoidance responses, social dysfunction responses, and increased vigilance responses, with 17 items and a five-point score. The higher the score, the higher the severity of the psychological trauma caused by the past period of attention to a catastrophic time. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the scale in this study was 0.97, and the KMO and Bartlett test coefficients were 0.96.
Depression Anxiety Stress Scales. The simplified Chinese version of the self-rating emotional scale (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales) was revised by Gong Xu et al. (2010) and used (Gong, Xie, Xu, & Luo, 2010). The scale includes three factors—stress, anxiety, and depression; for 21 questions in the form of five-point scoring. The higher the score, the worse the participants’ emotional state in the past period. After confirmatory factor analysis, for the items whose common factor variances of A1, A2, and A3 were less than 0.50, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.96, and the KMO and Bartlett test coefficients were 0.97.
Empathy Self-Rating Scale. Wu Jingji (1987) revised the Interpersonal Responsiveness Index based on the one compiled by Davis (1980). The scale comprises four factors, including fantasy empathy, empathy, empathy, and personal pain, with 28 items scored on a five-point scale. The higher the score, the higher the degree of empathy and consideration from the perspective of others. After confirmatory factor analysis, items whose common factor variances of B2, B5, B12, B20, B22, and B24 were less than 0.50 were deleted, and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the scale was 0. 69. Further, the KMO and Bartlett test coefficients were 0.89.
Five-factor of Mindfulness Questionnaire. The five-factor mindfulness scale (Five Factors of Mindfulness Questionnaire) revised by Deng et al. (2011) was used. The scale comprises five factors: observation, description, conscious action, non-judgment, and non-action, with 28 items. It is scored on a five-point scale. The higher the score, the higher the degree of participants’ ability to “focus on the present and perceive what they are doing, and not criticize or evaluate the things around them.” After confirmatory factor analysis, the items whose common factor variances of C1, C11, C25, C26, and C33 were less than 0.50. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.61, and the KMO and Bartlett test coefficients were 0.93.
Catastrophic Event Concern Self-Rating Questionnaire. An independent variable questionnaire was used to evaluate participants’ degree of attention, follow-up, and participation in catastrophic events. The questionnaire includes six items, including concern about recent catastrophic events, follow-up, participation in discussion, and evaluation of the degree of concern, and is scored by five points. The higher the score, the higher the concern regarding recent catastrophic events. After the reliability and validity tests, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the questionnaire was 0.85, and the KMO and Bartlett test coefficients were 0.81, which showed that the questionnaire had high reliability and validity.
Data analysis. SPSS Windows software version 25.0 was used for descriptive statistics and correlation analyses. Amos 23.0, SPSS 25.0, and its plug-in Process v3.5 (Hayes, 2018) were used to test reliability and validity.