Correlates of Secondary Traumatic Stress Among Social Work Interns

Introduction and Background

Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS) has become an increasingly important area of research, given the high rates found in samples of social workers. A small body of literature has extended this area of study with a focus on the correlates of STS among social work students in field placement. Past research has found higher rates of STS among social work students based on demographics, pre-existing trauma, and exposure to client trauma during training or field placements. This study seeks to further advance this line of inquiry through an examination of possible correlates from a number of domains, including the student, field placement agency, field agency supervisor, and field seminar.

Methods

Using a cross-sectional survey design, we examined the relationships between STS and variables representing the student, agency, supervisor, and seminar. Eighty MSW interns completed the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (STSS) (Bride et al., 2004), the Trauma-Informed Climate Scale-10 (Hales et al., 2019), and the Classroom Community Scale (Rovai, 2002), in addition to questions about their field supervisors (Lietz & Julien-Chinn, 2017), internship field of practice, trauma-informed approaches, field seminar structure, and demographics. With STS as the dependent variable, four regression models (one for each of the four domains of independent variables) were tested. A final regression model was created using the significant variables from the initial four models.

Results

The final model, which included two variables that proved to be significant in the initial models, demonstrated sufficient fit (F=8.822, p<.001). These two significant variables focused on sexual orientation and the field of practice within the student’s internship site. The average queer student had an STSS score 7 points higher than the average straight student. The average student interning in a child welfare agency scored 8 points higher than the average student in all other settings. The adjusted r-square was .160, indicating that 16 percent of the variance in STSS scores is explained by sexual orientation and field of practice, specifically whether the practice is in child welfare or another field. STSS scores were not significantly related to the remaining variables representing the individual (race), agency (trauma-informed climate), internship supervisor (availability, supportive nature, or use of a trauma-informed approach), or field seminar (classroom connectedness, structure of seminar sessions, or use of a trauma-informed approach).

Conclusions

These results align with past research that identified the child welfare field as a risky one for social work students. This study also points to an unexplored issue of higher risk among queer social work students. Further research is needed to more fully understand the reasons behind this elevated risk and the ways in which social work programs and placement sites can support these students. Note is also made of the non-significant findings regarding variables representing the students’ supervisors and seminars. These results may indicate that the trauma-informed approach of supervisors and instructors is not sufficient for preventing onset of STS among social work students, though the approach may be important for addressing STS once it develops.