Search results

This study aims to develop and test a multivariable psychosocial prediction model of subjective well-being in Ukrainian adults (n = 1,248) 1.5 years after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The research design followed the “Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis” checklist. The online survey combined a questionnaire on sociodemographic characteristics and specifics of living in wartime, as well as validated self-reported inventories: The Modified BBC Subjective Well-being Scale, Acceptance and Action Questionnaire – Version 2 and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale-10.

The initially developed model was tested through regression analysis, which revealed nine variables as predictors of the subjective well-being scores within the sample, explaining 49.3% of its variance. Among them, the strongest were living with a friend and receiving mental health care systematically. They were almost twice as influential as forced displacement abroad and trauma exposure, which predicted lower well-being, and living with a spouse, which forecasted higher well-being scores. Two resilience subscales – adjustment and restoring and resistance – as predictors of better well-being and perceived unsuccess in life and age as predictors of lower well-being were relatively weaker but statistically significant.

The obtained results support the previous evidence on the essential role of accessible mental health services and social support in times of war, as well as the deteriorative effect of trauma exposure and forcible taking refuge on subjective well-being.

This study aims to develop and test multivariable psychosocial prediction models of perceived post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex post-traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) symptoms development among trauma-exposed Ukrainian adults (n = 761) after 1.5 years of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

This research was designed as a survey in line with the methodology of “Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis” checklist. The survey included a questionnaire on sociodemographic characteristics and specifics of trauma exposure, as well as validated self-reported inventories: The International Trauma Questionnaire, Acceptance and Action Questionnaire – version 2, Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale-10 and the Modified BBC Subjective Well-being Scale.

Regression analysis revealed different prediction models for PTSD and CPTSD symptoms, explaining 18.4% and 41.4% of their variance with five and eight predictors, respectively. Four variables were similar in predicting PTSD and CPTSD: war-relatedness of trauma, living with a friend, perceived physical health and regret for the past. War-relatedness of trauma the respondents were exposed to was among the strongest predictors for PTSD and CPTSD severity. However, living with a friend was almost equally strong in mitigating these mental consequences. Regret for past and lowly rated physical health were assessed as relatively weaker but statistically significant predictors in this study.

Upon the original theoretical framework, two psychosocial prediction models were developed for PTSD and CPTSD symptoms in a non-clinical sample of trauma-exposed Ukrainian adults.

Conventional wisdom tells us that mediation without ripeness is a fool’s errand (Zartman and Touval, 1985). What, then, is Türkiye’s motivation for mediating the war in Ukraine in lieu of ripeness – and what can its behavior as a mediator tell us about that motivation? In pursuit of this question, this paper inductively analyzes Turkish mediation in the Ukraine war to unpack the relationship between a contextual (ripeness) and actor-level (motivation) variable. Of particular interest is the decision-making and behavior of third parties (like Türkiye in Ukraine) who elect to mediate highly complex conflicts in which ripeness is indiscernible. The purpose of this research is not to propose or test a causal relationship between obscured ripeness and mediation, but rather to examine mediation behavior in situations where ripeness is obscured.

The impact of weaponized information on ripeness and third-party mediation is evaluated through an original, systematic and inductive case study analysis of Turkish mediation in the Russia–Ukraine war. As an intense theater of operations for information warfare for well over a decade, the war in Ukraine serves as an especially apt choice for an analysis of “obscured ripeness.” Likewise, Türkiye’s anomalous position as the only substantive source of mediation in the conflict lends significance to an empirical examination of its motivation and behavior as a mediator.

This research reveals that the pervasive use of weaponized information in the Russia–Ukraine war has distorted and disordered the information environment, thereby obscuring the ability of third parties to determine if the conflict is or could be ripe for mediation. However, the condition of obscured ripeness that prevails in the conflict has not proven a deterrent for mediation by Türkiye, which, as the only mediator in the conflict, has used a transactional approach to mediation motivated by self-regarding interests and animated by a manipulative mediation strategy. In sum, this inductive analysis of Turkish mediation in Ukraine reveals that the use of weaponized information in a conflict indirectly selects on transactional mediation (and mediators). The significance of this finding is magnified by the widespread use of weaponized information in contemporary conflicts as well as the declining frequency of third-party mediation.

There have been few, if any, systematic assessments in Turkish mediation of the Russia–Ukraine war, and none specifically concerned with the effects of weaponized information. Additionally, the paper proposes a typology of mediator motivation that is used to structure that assessment, while also introducing a new concept (“obscured ripeness”) and linking that concept both to the existing literature on ripeness and to the use of weaponized information in contemporary armed conflicts. As such, this manuscript represents an important contribution both to the empirical and theoretical landscape with respect to the study of mediation and international conflict management.