Date: Friday, May 3, 1996 Name: Ann Good Example
Journal Article Summary
Authors: Thomas A. Mellman, Daniella David, Renee Kulick-Bell, and Joanne Hebding
Title: Sleep disturbance and its relationship to psychiatric morbidity after hurricane Andrew
Journal: American Journal of Psychiatry
Year: November 1995 Volume: 152 Pages: 1659-1663
Introduction
Why was the study conducted?
The study was conducted in order to find out how a stress, such as Hurricane Andrew which
leads to psychiatric morbidity, can change sleep patterns.
What were the independent and dependent variables? What was the experimental question or hypothesis?
The independent variables are Hurricane Andrew and the different psychiatric illness that
resulted because of the hurricane. The dependent variable is the amount/different sleep disturbances
that occur as a result of the stress of the hurricane. The experimenters were trying to answer the
question, will the stress of Hurricane Andrew cause people to suffer from sleep disturbances;
and if they did, did some who suffer from a psychiatric illness differ from others without disorders?
Method:
Who were the subjects?
The subjects included 54 adults, 12 men and 42 women with an average age of 40.4 years,
who were living in areas that were directly affected by Hurricane Andrew. The control group
included 9 adults, 5 men and 4 women with an average age of 40.2, who were associated
with the affected areas.
How were ethical and humanistic issues handled?
There could be many ethical issues involved in this study due to how many lives the hurricane touched,
but the experimenters took time to have detailed interviews with each subject. If there was something
extremely wrong with a subject, they could have been referred for psychiatric help. With the information
collected, they can begin to treat many sleep problems. Subjects also signed an informed consent form.
What staff, materials, or other resources were used?
There was no mention of staff except for those who interviewed the subjects and those who were trained
to interpret the data from the sleep laboratory. In the sleep laboratory, the data was recorded on cardiac
and respiratory monitors, EKG, EEG, and EMG. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was used to
assess sleep disturbance. In order to determine if someone was suffering from Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder, they used the DSM-III-R symptom criteria. The interview structure was the Structured
Clinical Interview for DSM-III-RNon-Patient Version.
Describe the setting in which the study took place.
The study was conducted in South Dade County, Florida during the clean-up of Hurricane Andrew.
The study of the sleep disturbances of the subjects was conducted in a sleep laboratory where the
subjects spent two days.
Describe the independent variables; the procedures implemented.
The first independent variable was Hurricane Andrew that destroyed areas of South Dade County,
Florida in August of 1992. Buildings were damaged due to 160 miles per hour winds and electricity
and water supplies were disrupted. The terror of the storm also slowed rescue and recovery efforts.
Once the storm was over, the stress began. The stress level rose as those affected tried to rebuild their
lives. The second independent variable was the psychiatric illness suffered for those who witnessed the
trauma of Hurricane Andrew. The most common disorder was post-traumatic stress disorder. People also
suffered from depression and anxiety disorders.
How were variable measured? Comment on reliability and validity of measurement.
First, the subjects were given an assessment determining what kind of psychiatric disorder they
suffered from. In order to ensure the reliability and validity of the results, they used the Structured
Clinical Interview for DSM-III-RNon-Patient Version. When they measured the patterns of
sleep disturbance before the assessment, they used the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and then
added a modified version to find out about sleep patterns before the Hurricane. When the subjects
were put in the sleep laboratory, monitors and computers measured the sleep activity, this data
was recorded by trained technicians.
What experimental design was employed? Comment on its adequacy.
There was a large experimental group and that group was divided into those who suffered
from psychiatric morbidity and those who did not. The control group was much smaller.
The size of the control group is surprising due to the large experimental group.
Results:
Describe the results in words:
Those with active morbidity suffered from bad dreams, global severity, sleep disturbances,
and awakenings. Those who suffered from active morbidity and those who did not have
above average scores that signified sleep disturbances, but those with psychiatric illness
scored significantly higher. These scores were based on a global severity. The average
was 5, but the people with active morbidity scored 9.5 while those without active morbidity
scored 5. When ten hurricane victims, or "experimental" group, were compared to the control
group, victims entered more often into state 1 sleep and had more arousal per hour.
Sketch the graphic representation of the results. (Just indicate trends in data.
A precise reproduction is not necessary.).

Discussion:
How were results interpreted? How do they relate to the experimental question or hypothesis?
The results supported their hypothesis that that Hurricane Andrew brought about psychiatric
morbidity that led to sleep disturbances. They also found that "bad dreams" and post-traumatic
stress disorder are related. This finding supported past experiments, although this was not a true
experiment and the experimental independent variable was not manipulated by an experimenter.
What is the major contribution of the study to the literature?
Since this article came from the American Journal of Psychiatry, it will be useful to all psychiatrists who
read this journal. Maybe with this information they can diagnose a patients sleeping disorder if they had
recently witnessed a trauma. It may also prompt other experiments dealing with this subject.
Comments:
Add any comments on the adequacy of the study, your comments about any
issues that it raises, and so on.
I thought this study was conducted very well. Although I had to receive help understanding the
terminology of some of the research terms, the article was overall easy to understand. There was
not much detail provided in the article regarding the study, but it seemed they did much research
even though they did not print the information.