Trauma and journalist’ safety: Coping strategies and post-traumatic stress symptoms in professionals covering international conflicts

Abstract

The safety of journalists covering conflict goes beyond their physical protection. It includes the psychological impact of repeated exposure to traumatic events. This study employs a mixed methodology across two complementary studies to analyse how revictimization, coping strategies, and working conditions affect the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in journalists. In Study 1 (qualitative) we conducted 24 in-depth interviews to experienced conflict journalists that revealed a culture of silence around trauma, a consistent absence of support protocols in the media, and the widespread use of emotional suppression as a coping strategy. In Study 2 (quantitative, n = 85) we applied a moderate mediation model (PROCESS Macro, Model 10) to verify these findings. Results showed clinically relevant levels of PTSD (M = 36.98), with 54.12% of the sample exceeding the cut-off point. We identified a direct effect of revictimization on PTSD in journalists conditioned by working conditions. We also found that the indirect effect (revictimization → emotional suppression → PTSD) was significant for journalists with precarious contracts, regardless of the break after coverage. These results underline that job insecurity enhances the harmful role of emotional suppression, situating trauma not as an inevitable collateral damage, but as a result of the interaction between risk exposure, individual coping strategies, and the labour structures of the media.

Keywords

journalist safety post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)revictimisation job insecurity journalism (profession)mixed methods emotional suppression precarious labour conditions

Introduction

Conflict journalism has long attracted scholarly attention, yet the first study on the health impact of war reporting was not published until 2002 (Feinstein et al., 2002). A decade later, the United Nations Plan of Action (UNESCO, 2012) marked a turning point in placing journalists’ wellbeing on institutional and academic agendas (CFOM, 2025; Westlund et al., 2024). Still, the profession remains shaped by “sexism, machoism, and a fierce competition breeding a newsroom culture that makes it difficult for journalists to openly speak about the emotional fallout from trauma exposure” (Obermaier et al., 2023:1414). This environment fosters silence around psychological impact, with many fearing professional repercussions if they disclose trauma-related struggles (Aoki et al., 2012). While progress has been made in some countries, the issue remains largely absent from the Spanish debate.

Situated within journalism and trauma literature, particularly research on covering potentially traumatic events (PTEs) (MacDonald et al., 2017; Osmann et al., 2021), this study addresses a critical gap. Conflict reporters show some of the highest post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) prevalence rates, comparable to war veterans (Aoki et al., 2012; Feinstein et al., 2002). Yet previous scholarship has focused on physical, digital, or general psychological safety, rarely addressing trauma explicitly or linking it to working conditions and newsroom culture. While avoidance strategies have been documented, their impact on conflict reporters remains underexplored (Thomson, 2021). Leading institutions like the Dart Center emphasize examining multiple risk factors simultaneously, noting the scarcity of integrated studies (Smith et al., 2015).

Research remains notably limited. The only quantitative study to date touching on journalist safety—though not trauma—is a Reporters Without Borders Spain (RSF) and University of Valladolid report on Spanish journalists covering the Ukraine war (Etura and Martín Sánchez, 2022). Its findings underscore the precariousness of conflict reporting under a Mediterranean or polarized pluralist media model (Hallin and Mancini, 2004), characterized by temporary contracts (Tejedor et al., 2020), lack of institutional support, and minimal training or safety protocols (Unda-Endemaño et al., 2022). This gap highlights the urgency of integrating trauma into the broader discussion of journalistic safety, not only in Spain. This article provides the first empirical evidence showing how specific conditions interact, amplifying their impact on journalists’ mental health.

This article incorporates coverage-related trauma as a key dimension of safety by measuring relationships between three critical factors: repeated exposure to potentially traumatic events (PTEs) (revictimization), coping strategies, and PTSD symptomatology. These are examined alongside structural conditions, including contractual precariousness, the implementation of post-assignment rest periods—internationally recommended but inconsistently applied. To our knowledge, no previous study has directly examined revictimization among conflict journalists or provided empirical evidence on the mediating and moderating roles of coping strategies and workplace conditions in PTSD development. The contribution lies in showing not only prevalence (how common the issue is), but also mechanism (how and why it occurs) and enabling conditions, thereby advancing journalist safety debates in Spain and internationally.

Following the literature on journalism in conflict zones (2.1), revictimization (2.2), and structural precarity (2.3), this article asks how the interaction between exposure, working conditions, and coping strategies shapes PTSD in conflict reporters (3). The answer derives from two complementary studies: an exploratory qualitative study (4.1) and a quantitative study (4.2) measuring the interaction. These studies are described consecutively—first Study 1’s design and results, then Study 2’s—to underline how Study 1’s results informed Study 2’s variables. After the quantitative results, the article closes with discussion and conclusion (5).

Literature review and conceptual framework

Journalism in conflict zones: Safety and trauma

Research on the safety of journalists covering conflicts has traditionally focused on physical safety, with recent data being particularly alarming. Yet journalists’ safety extends beyond the physical threatening their psychological, digital and financial integrity and well-being: threats to journalists’ safety — “the actions and conditions that increase the risk of physical, psychological, digital and financial harm to journalists as human beings and institutional actors” (Slavtcheva-Petkova et al., 2023:5)— must be tracked, as “monitoring threats and attacks is essential for advancing research on journalists’ safety” (Harrison et al., 2020). This study contributes to that regard by identifying war coverage as the major type of stressor among threats and attacks (Osmann et al., 2021).

Most research has examined journalists’ conditions for physical safety (Etura and Martín Sánchez, 2022; UNESCO, 2012, 2022), addressing issues such as training (Iturregui Mardaras et al., 2017; Shapiro et al., 2017) and the importance of legal and institutional support regarding equipment or insurance coverage (Lisosky and Henrichsen, 2009; Tenore, 2012). However, the psychological dimension has been studied later and less extensively, perhaps because “if professionalising physical safety was difficult, establishing the importance of emotional health was more controversial” (Cottle et al., 2016:179). Studies from psychiatry and psychology (MacDonald et al., 2017; Pyevich et al., 2003) have contributed interdisciplinary knowledge, though often referring to journalists’ safety only tangentially.

This research instead advances decidedly on the psychological dimension of journalists’ safety, framed within the journalism studies tradition but implemented through a multidisciplinary team with a psychological conceptual framework.

Revictimization: Repeated exposure to PTEs, coping, and PTSD

Covering armed conflicts, humanitarian crises, and situations of extreme violence exposes journalists to PTEs on a recurring basis, triggering severe psychological consequences—with PTSD being one of the most disabling (MacDonald et al., 2022). Since the first study on PTSD among conflict reporters (Feinstein et al., 2002), academic literature has consistently documented high prevalence of post-traumatic symptomatology in this professional group (Feinstein et al., 2018; Feinstein and Osmann, 2023). Intimidations, direct exposure to death, and even mock executions form part of conflict journalists’ common experience.

Research has often focused on acute exposure to single traumatic events, leaving relatively unexplored the cumulative impact of revictimization—defined as repeated exposure to highly distressing situations (Cividanes et al., 2019; Weiss, 2025). Over more than two decades, revictimization has emerged as a critical risk factor in the development and chronicity of PTSD (Dworznik, 2006, 2011; Newman et al., 2003). In cases related to direct and indirect violence, repeated traumatic exposure lowers the stress-response threshold, exacerbating psychological and physiological reactivity to subsequent events—even less intense ones (Flores Morales et al., 2016). Each new assignment adds to the cumulative psychological burden, and accumulating years covering conflicts is a known risk factor (Aoki et al., 2012). Studies with journalists confirm this, showing that frequency and intensity of exposure correlate directly with PTSD symptom severity (Pyevich et al., 2003; Smith et al., 2017).

Journalists develop coping mechanisms to manage the emotional toll of repeated exposure. Among these, emotional suppression—inhibiting emotional expression—stands out for its frequent use in professional environments that emphasize objectivity and impartiality, where showing vulnerability may be perceived as unprofessional (Hughes et al., 2021; Ivask et al., 2024). Ethnographic research shows how journalists ‘lock away’ emotions, a process central to professional culture (Buchanan and Keats, 2011). Yet research on emotion regulation indicates that avoidant strategies, while functional in the short term for task performance, are associated with long-term negative affectivity, physiological reactivity, and psychopathology, including PTSD (Monteiro et al., 2015).

This study proposes that emotional suppression functions as a key mediating mechanism: revictimization fosters this maladaptive coping strategy, which in turn heightens vulnerability to PTSD. This hypothesis (see Study (2) aligns with prior findings linking avoidant coping with poorer psychological outcomes among journalists (MacDonald et al., 2022).

The precarity of journalism: The threat at home

It is also crucial to consider the role of workplace and organizational contexts in this process. Factors such as contractual precarity—a pressing concern in Spain (Palau-Sampio and López-García, 2025)—or the absence of post-assignment protocols (Unda-Endemaño et al., 2022), including lack of rest days, are not mere background conditions but constitutive elements of the trauma experience. Job insecurity and pressure to produce content without decompression periods intensify feelings of helplessness and restrict access to support networks, making emotional suppression the only available coping resource (Hughes et al., 2021).

Systematic studies show that organizational stressors, such as lack of institutional support, are significant predictors of psychological distress among journalists—sometimes even more so than trauma exposure itself (Monteiro et al., 2015; Osmann et al., 2021). This study therefore incorporates these variables as moderators, hypothesizing that the relationship between revictimization, emotional suppression, and PTSD will be stronger among journalists working under precarious conditions and without paid rest periods—an interaction not yet empirically tested.

Media organizations remain central to journalists’ well-being. Following early studies documenting the impact of coverage (Feinstein et al., 2002), outlets such as the BBC began implementing measures to improve safety (Cottle et al., 2016) and reshaping corporate culture, offering confidential counselling to those in need (Cramer, 2002; Feinstein et al., 2014). Nonetheless, attention to mental health remains one of the newsroom’s main challenges, and recent work calls for stronger managerial involvement and intervention (Miller, 2025; Obermaier et al., 2023).

Scholars have emphasized the need to discuss interventions that prevent PTSD. Recommendations include trauma-informed training for professionals (Ogunyemi and Price, 2023:2), raising editor awareness, and preparing them to identify and support employees with PTSD symptoms (Aoki et al., 2012:387; Cottle et al., 2016:179). Such interventions can help create healthier workplaces and address needs that yield both organizational and individual benefits (Idås et al., 2019).

This article addresses the need to move beyond fragmented approaches that isolate trauma exposure, coping, and workplace context. Instead, it builds on prior findings to propose an integrated moderated mediation model that contributes to a more nuanced understanding of trauma in journalism, framing it not as a mere occupational hazard but as a phenomenon deeply embedded in the economic and organizational structures of media institutions.

Research question and hypotheses

To explore conflict journalists’ repeated exposure to stressful events and its relationship with occupational and psychosocial variables, the article starts from a central overarching question:

How do repeated exposure to traumatic events and precarious working conditions interact to influence PTSD development in conflict journalists, and what mediating role do coping strategies play in this relationship?

To address this question, the article adopts a sequential exploratory mixed-methods design integrating a qualitative study (Study (1) and a quantitative study (Study (2) to provide comprehensive understanding of trauma in conflict journalism. In Study 1, an in-depth qualitative approach identified emerging factors, narratives, and contextual elements related to trauma. Building on these findings, Study 2 operationalizes and empirically tests a theoretical statistical model examining relationships among revictimization, emotional suppression, and job insecurity in relation to PTSD development. This methodological strategy enables both in-depth exploration of subjective experiences and statistical validation of relationships between key variables, thereby overcoming limitations of prior research that has predominantly examined trauma through fragmented and isolated factors. By elucidating interplay among multiple risk dimensions, this integrated approach responds to recent calls to move beyond reductionist frameworks and simultaneously examine complex mechanisms and moderating conditions underlying trauma in conflict journalism.

Studies

Study 1

Methods

Our qualitative Study 1 examined journalists’ experiences covering international conflicts. We conducted 24 in-depth interviews—a technique effective for capturing interviewees’ perspectives and attributed meanings (Taylor et al., 2016). This approach, used in research on journalism in contexts of violence (Tejedor et al., 2020), reflects a growing trend of applying qualitative methods to explore journalists’ experiences and complement traditional research (MacDonald et al., 2017).

Sample

The sample of 24 journalists included 13 freelancers, 10 women, and a range of professional backgrounds, with 6 to 37 years of field coverage. Participants worked in regional and national media and had extensive reporting experience in high-risk environments, including conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, and Gaza. Participant details are available in Table 1.

Table 1.

Interviewed journalists.

Journalist	Type of media	Type of employment	Professional experience in conflict reporting	Gender
J1	Private media	Freelance	More than 11 years	Male
J2	Private media	Freelance	18 years	Male
J3	Public media	Freelance	11 years	Female
J4	Public and private media	Freelance	15 years	Male
J5	Private media	Freelance	More than 11 years	Male
J6	Private media	Freelance	12 years	Female
J7	Private media	Staff	Around 31 years	Male
J8	Private media	Freelance	6 years	Female
J9	Private media	Freelance	20 years	Male
J10	Private media	Staff	34 years	Male
J11	Private media	Staff	31 years	Male
J12	Private media	Freelance	14 years	Male
J13	Private media	Staff	15 years	Female
J14	Public media	Staff	17 years	Female
J15	Public media	Staff	14 years	Female
J16	Private media	Staff	37 years	Female
J17	Private media	Staff	22 years	Female
J18	Public media	Staff	18 years	Male
J19	Private media	Freelance	13 years	Male
J20	Private media	Freelance	27 years	Male
J21	Public media	Staff	Around 12 years	Female
J22	Private media	Freelance	16 years	Male
J23	Private media	Freelance	11 years	Male
J24	Public media	Staff	31 years	Female

Ethical standards and procedure

Participants were contacted by email with the study’s objectives. Those who agreed scheduled a virtual appointment via Skype. Before each interview, participants consented to full recording for later analysis under confidentiality protocols. Semi-structured interviews focused on four areas: trauma experience and post-trauma after covering critical events, PTSD symptoms and possible diagnosis, emotional regulation strategies, and working conditions. Interviews lasted approximately 45–75 minutes. All interviews were conducted in Spanish, the native language of both the participants and the researchers, between 2021 and 2022, facilitating depth of expression and nuanced discussion of sensitive experiences.

Content analysis was carried out manually, systematizing and coding data to identify patterns, themes, and categories related to trauma exposure and its psychological impact on journalists. The research was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of the Basque Country EHU.

Results study 1

The interviews generated substantial data, detailed elsewhere. Here, we focus on findings most directly informing Study 2. This section is structured around three strands: first, coverage impact, including PTSD symptomatology and the perceived social value of the condition; second, precarious labour conditions and absence of safety protocols in the media industry; and third, coping strategies journalists use to manage the emotional toll of their work.

Impact of coverage: Symptomatology, PTSD, and taboo

Interviews revealed the psychological impact of reporting in conflict zones, characterized by intense emotional activation linked to event memories and challenges readjusting to everyday life post-assignment. Some journalists reported PTSD-consistent symptoms, while others downplayed or denied long-term effects, though moments of vulnerability were widely acknowledged.

“I have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder for 5–6 years, and I have paid for the treatment myself. […] There came a point when, if I didn’t pay for that treatment, I couldn’t continue developing my profession” (J21).

Participants also described symptoms of lesser severity but persistent: “Nightmares, excessive sensitivity to noises, mood swings… but I have been fortunate because I don’t believe I have suffered serious psychological damage” (J16).

A sense of disorientation upon returning to everyday life: “When I came back, I felt like some kind of alien. What interested other people seemed trivial to me, and what was worrying for me nobody valued” (J15).

Numerous testimonies highlighted a persistent taboo around psychological effects, especially among men: “We are superheroes and cannot have a weakness that makes us human. And we cannot be human; we must be better than the rest. And that is a problem” (J19).

Others criticized the traditional image of the war correspondent, which denies any emotional impact: “We need to dismantle that image of the correspondent who cures depression with gin and tonics. Many are traumatized but recognizing it still carries stigma” (J21).

Even when some journalists reported not having developed PTSD, many acknowledged that certain images or experiences remain indelibly engraved: “What affects me most is always seeing children destroyed and broken, or with bloated stomachs from hunger. […] You cannot easily get it out of your head” (J20).

Precarity in the media: Lack of protocols and rest measures

The absence of institutional protocols to support journalists’ mental health—whether freelance or staff—was a recurrent topic. Most interviewees had never received post-assignment psychological support.

“No one has ever asked me, ‘Are you okay?’, ‘Do you have nightmares?’, ‘Do you think you need psychological help?’ Forget about treatment, therapy, or anything like that” (J15).

Journalists also criticized the absence of an organizational environment that allows the expression of suffering without fear of stigma or professional delegitimization: “In the media, we are still thought of as robots with no feelings. Nobody asks how you are or whether you have been able to sleep after seeing what you have seen” (J19).

“Not even public media have reintegration protocols. NGOs do: they offer psychological treatment even if you don’t have a pathology. Just to help you reintegrate” (J21).

Coping strategies: How journalists manage emotional impact

In the absence of institutional support, journalists develop individual coping strategies to manage emotional impact, including preventive mechanisms during coverage and readjustment processes upon returning. Some rely on informal support from close personal networks (J7) or formal support through international networks (J17); others use rationalization and self-control (J24), emotional release (J15), or writing (J8).

However, the most frequently employed strategies are avoidant. Some professionals adopt rigorous emotional control, suppressing affective expression to protect themselves or others: “I have cried, of course, but I try not to dwell on it […] or I allow myself to break down only when what is needed is to stay strong” (J24).

They often avoid narrating their experiences outside the professional context, opting for silence: “In the end, you learn that they [referring to the media or people around you] don’t really want to know what happened; it’s something you have to manage on your own” (J10).

Or try not to externalize emotions or to maintain an image of strength: “The figure of the superman who overcomes everything, when in reality we are normal people” (J7) “No colleague will admit that they went to a psychologist” (J19).

These qualitative findings not only illustrate the reality of trauma in journalists but also served as the basis for the operationalization of variables in Study 2. Revictimization, emotional suppression, and job insecurity emerged as the key constructs measured and tested in the subsequent quantitative model.

Study 2

For Study 2, we analysed a moderate mediation model with a sample of Spanish journalists to examine how contractual precariousness and lack of rest moderate the relationship between revictimization and PTSD through emotional suppression. Based on previous literature, the following hypotheses were proposed:

Revictimization (repeated exposure to highly stressful events) will have a direct positive effect on greater PTSD symptomatology.

Emotional suppression will mediate the relationship between revictimization and PTSD, such that greater revictimization will predict greater use of emotional suppression, which in turn will be associated with more severe levels of PTSD.

The relationship between revictimization and PTSD (both direct and indirect through emotional suppression) will be moderated by working conditions. Specifically, the effect will be strongest in journalists with precarious contracts (H3a) and in journalists who do not receive paid days off after their coverage (H3b).

Methods

Sample

The sample consisted of 85 journalists (50,5% women) covering international conflicts for Spanish media outlets. Inclusion required covering at least one international conflict and more than 1 year of experience (sociodemographic information in Table 2). Most held journalism degrees, others reported degrees in fields such as architecture, fine arts, political science, law, and philosophy. Professionally, the sample comprised mainly newswriters, chief editors, and correspondents.

Table 2.

Demographic characteristics of the sample for study 2. Reporting valid percentages (%). The Education category allowed a multiple-choice option.

Characteristics	Full sample (N = 85)
Age M(SD)	48.27 (10.61)
Education
Journalism degree	69.4%
Degree in audio-visual communication	5.9%
Degree in public relations and advertising	1.2%
Other degree or bachelor’s degree	27.1%
Non-university education	14.1%
Professional category
Newswriter	29.4%
Camera	7.1%
Photographer	9.4%
Correspondent	17.6%
Special correspondent	1.2%
Chief editor (section)	11.8%
Freelance	9.4%
Retired	3.5%

Participants averaged 14.07 years of coverage (SD = 10.84), ranging from one to 40 years. Journalists reported covering conflicts from the 1991 Gulf War to current wars in Ukraine and Palestine-Israel. Regarding media funding, although the mean score exceeded the theoretical midpoint (M = 2, range 0-4), insurance and equipment were not always funded (M = 3.11; SD = 1.61). No significant gender differences were found in years of coverage or media funding.

Ethical standards and procedure

Based on Study 1 results, we created a questionnaire with the theoretically most relevant variables. To recruit participants for the quantitative phase, we compiled a database of Spanish conflict journalists by reviewing bylines in major national media outlets and collecting publicly available professional email addresses. This convenience sample was contacted via email with an invitation letter detailing the study’s purpose and ethical considerations. We also used a snowball strategy, asking journalists to forward the questionnaire to colleagues. Upon accessing the survey link (hosted on EncuestaFacil), participants completed a digital informed consent form before proceeding to the approximately 20-min questionnaire. We sent 356 invitations, achieving a 24% response rate (n = 85), consistent with survey research in this field (Shih and Fan, 2009). The protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of [Redacted] University.

Measures

Personal information: We collected data on sex, age, and education (university degree or non-university studies).

Working conditions: We asked about current professional relationship in terms of employment contract with the media. Responses were categorized into precarious contracts (those without contractual security, indefinite terms, etc.) and non-precarious contracts (full-time, permanent staff, etc.). Participants indicated whether, after coverage, they were offered paid days off by the media outlets they work for (yes/no). Finally, we inquired about media funding via two items on insurance and equipment: “Do you have insurance provided and paid for by the media outlet you work for?” and “Has the media outlet provided you with security equipment?” Response range: 0 = Never to 4 = Always.

Conflict coverage: Journalists reported the conflicts covered throughout their careers (as the First Gulf War, the Balcan Wars, the War in Afganistán, in Siria, Iraq, etc.) and total years spent covering international conflicts.

Emotional suppression: We used the Measure of Affect Regulation Styles (MARS) (adapted to Spanish by Puente-Martínez et al., 2018) to assess emotional intensity during conflict coverage and coping responses. Specifically, we used two emotional suppression items describing emotional response regulation: “Trying not to show my feelings, suppressing all expression of them” and “Faking or expressing emotions opposite to those felt.” Response range: 0 = Never to 6 = Always. Analyses used the mean of both variables; higher scores indicate greater use of this coping strategy (α = .805).

Revictimization: To assess revictimization, journalists were asked whether they had been repeatedly exposed to situations causing high distress while covering international conflicts (Yes/No).

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): To assess PTSD symptom severity, we used the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) (adapted to Spanish by Echeburúa et al., 2016), a 20-item self-report measure corresponding to DSM-5 PTSD symptoms. Response scale: 0 = Not at all to 4 = Extremely, with the statement: “Could you tell us how much you have suffered from each of the symptoms listed below during the last month as a result of any coverage provided during your professional career?” Items are summed for a total score (0–80), with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity (α = .943).

Statistical analysis

First, the sample was described using means, standard deviations, and ranges (continuous variables) and frequencies and percentages (categorical variables). Second, preliminary analyses assessed relationships between sociodemographic and work-related variables and the dependent (PTSD) and independent (revictimization) variables to determine covariate inclusion. We applied independent samples t-tests (education, conflict covered), one-way ANOVAs (professional category), and correlations (age, media funding, years of coverage). Only age (r = −.270; p = .012) and media funding (r = −.302; p = .005) correlated significantly with PTSD; years of coverage (r = .245; p = .024) and media funding (r = −.247; p = .023) correlated significantly with revictimization. Thus, age, years of coverage, and media funding were included as covariates. Gender showed no significant differences with any examined variable—including independent (revictimization), mediating (emotional suppression), moderating (job insecurity and rest period), or dependent (PTSD) variables.

Finally, to examine hypotheses, we conducted partial correlations (H1) and moderated mediation analyses (H1, H2, and H3) using SPSS V27. The moderated mediation analysis tested: (1) the direct effect of revictimization on PTSD (H1), (2) the indirect effect of revictimization on PTSD through emotional suppression (H2), and (3) the indirect effect conditioned by job insecurity (H3a) and the possibility of taking breaks (H3b) (Model 10). These analyses used the PROCESS MEDIATE v4.2 macro for SPSS v27 (Hayes, 2018), which estimated direct, indirect, and conditional indirect effects with standard errors (SE) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on the percentile Bootstrap method. This method uses resampling with replacement, generating 10,000 simulated samples to calculate standard errors. Indirect and conditional indirect effects are considered significant if the confidence interval does not include zero. Significance level was set at p ≤ .050.

Results

Correlational analysis

Table 3 presents descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations) for each study variable and partial correlations between them, controlling for age, years of coverage, and media funding. Overall post-traumatic stress values were elevated, exceeding the common cut-point (31–33) for indicating potential PTSD symptomatology (M = 36.98; SD = 14.96); 54.12% of the sample scored ≥33.

Table 3.

Descriptive analysis and partial correlations among target variables.

	Variables	1	2	3	4	5
1	PTSD	1
2	Revictimization	.365^***	1
3	Rest period	−.014	−.100	1
4	Job insecurity	.101	.199	−.137	1
5	Emotional suppression	.577^***	.221^*	−.028	.068	1
	M	36.98	–	–	–	1.38
	SD	14.96	–	–	–	1.49
	Range	1–5	0–1	0–1	0–1	0-6

Note. Control Variables: Age, years of coverage and media funding. In the PTSD scale, we used sum of the responses. Revictimization coded as 0 = No and 1 = Yes. Professional Relationship: 0 = non-precarious contracts and 1 = Precarious contracts. Small effect sizes (r = 0.10), medium (r = 0.30) and large (r = 0.50) (Cohen, 1988).

*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001.

Significant associations emerged among all variables of interest, indicating complex interrelationships. Correlation coefficients ranged from small to strong. Notably, PTSD correlated with greater revictimization and greater use of emotional suppression. Revictimization was also associated with greater use of emotional suppression.

Moderated mediation analysis

In order to verify whether revictimization has a direct effect on PTSD (H1), and whether the coping strategy of emotional suppression mediates the relationship between the two variables (H2), we performed a moderated mediation analysis, using the variables of rest after returning from coverage (H3a), and job insecurity within the media industry (i.e., the type of contract coded as precarious or non-precarious) (H3b) as moderating variables (see Figure 1). In this analysis, the direct effect is defined as the effect of revictimization on post-traumatic stress when the mediating variable (emotional suppression) is controlled. The analysis incorporated the variables of age, years of coverage and media funding as covariates.

Figure 1.

Model 10: Moderated mediation model. Direct effect of revictimization on PTSD and indirect effect through emotional suppression, conditioned by the rest period and job insecurity.

As illustrated in Figure 1, revictimization has a significant direct effect on PTSD, i.e., repeatedly experiencing situations of great distress (revictimization) during coverage is associated with greater symptoms of post-traumatic stress. Despite the absence of significant effects of revictimization on emotional suppression, this coping strategy demonstrated a significant and positive effect on post-traumatic stress. In essence, the more frequently participants employ the emotional suppression strategy, the higher their level of PTSD.

Table 4 shows a conditional direct effect of revictimization on PTSD, partially supporting hypothesis 1. This direct effect appears among participants without rest periods after coverage and without precarious contracts. We also found two significant conditional indirect effects of revictimization on PTSD through emotional suppression, conditioned by rest and professional relationship, supporting hypothesis 2 and 3. For journalists who have a precarious job contract with the media, there is an indirect effect of revictimization on PTSD through the emotional suppression strategy, regardless of whether they have rest periods after completing their coverage. Conversely, this indirect effect is not significant when journalists have a stable employment relationship. The model explains 48% of the total variance in post-traumatic stress.

Table 4.

Results of the moderated mediation analysis (PROCESS, model 10).

Predictive variables					IC 95%
Predictive variables	B	SE	t	p	LI	LS
Conditional direct effects
RV à PTSD (no rest & non-precarious)	12.107	5.225	2.317	.023	1.699	22.516
RV à PTSD (no rest & precarious)	8.135	7.621	1.067	.289	−7.050	23.321
RV à PTSD (rest & non-precarious)	6.301	4.425	1.423	.158	−2.516	15.118
RV à PTSD (rest & precarious)	1.816	8.784	0.206	.836	−15.687	19.319
Mediating variable model 1 (emotional suppression)
Revictimization	0.572	0.683	0.838	.655	−1.815	2.870
Rest period	−0.255	0.713	−0.357	.721	−1.676	1.166
Job insecurity	−0.670	0.989	−0.677	.500	−2.641	1.300
Age	0.014	0.022	0.630	.530	−0.030	0.058
Years of coverage	−0.0002	0.021	−0.010	0.991	−0.042	0.042
Media funding	−0.080	0.142	−0.563	.575	−0.364	0.203
R = 0.315; $R^{2}$ = 0.09; $F_{(8, 76)}$ = 1.049, p 07.
Mediating variable model 2 (PTSD)
Revictimization	12.107	5.225	2.317	.023	1.699	22.516
Emotional suppression	4.943	0.873	5.662	.0001	3.204	6.682
Rest period	3.277	5.434	0.603	.548	−7.549	14.104
Job insecurity	1.485	7.554	0.196	.844	−13.564	16.535
Age	−0.360	0.170	−2.119	.037	−0.699	−0.021
Years of coverage	−0.012	0.162	−0.079	.936	−0.335	0.310
Media funding	−0.711	1.087	−0.654	.515	−2.876	1.454
R = 0.697; $R^{2}$ = 0.485; $F_{(8, 76)}$ = 7.874, p = 0,0001

			IC 95%
	B	SE	LI	B
Conditional indirect effects
RV à SUPPR à PTSD (no rest & non-precarious)	2.521	3.268	−4.202	8.695
RV à SUPPR à PTSD (no rest & precarious)	8.774	3.633	2.251	16.446
RV à SUPPR à PTSD (rest & non-precarious)	3.834	1.975	−0.003	7.840
RV à SUPPR à PTSD (rest & precarious)	10.0877	4.799	1.928	20.747

Note. The table includes B coefficients, which are non-standardized regression coefficients. Bold values indicate statistical significance (p ≤0.05) based on upper and lower limit that do not include 0.

RV: revictimization, SUPPR: emotional suppression, PTSD: post-traumatic stress disorder.

Discussion & conclusions

This article contributes to debates on journalists’ safety by moving beyond traditional approaches, which examine individual (trauma exposure, coping strategies) and organizational (working conditions) factors in isolation. Using a mixed-method design, it shows that trauma among conflict journalists is the result of complex interactions between risk exposure, coping strategies, and structural conditions of media work. Previous evidence highlights high PTSD prevalence (Feinstein et al., 2002; MacDonald et al., 2022), the role of revictimization (Cividanes et al., 2019), and avoidant coping strategies (Buchanan and Keats, 2011; Ivask et al., 2024).

Our findings confirm a latent reality about the impact of trauma on journalists covering international conflicts, which underscores the centrality of working conditions on their psychological well-being. Evidence from both methodological approaches hold trauma at the centre enriching the value of the findings and highlighting robust, strong and multifaceted arguments for action.

Firstly, as posited in H1, findings confirmed the high psychological burden associated with the conflict journalism. Study 2 quantified clinically relevant PTSD levels (M = 36.98), with over half of participants (54.12%) exceeding the established cut-off, an alarming result consistent with previous studies. This complements Study 1 testimonies, where journalists openly describe PTSD-compatible symptoms (e.g., nightmares, hypervigilance, emotional maladjustment) and the “impact they have suffered”, thus corroborating that the consequences of trauma are a constant reality often hidden due to stigma (Olajide Talabi et al., 2024), to a newsroom culture of silence (Feinstein et al., 2002) and to lack of support protocols (Unda, 2023).

It is important to note that, while sexism and gender-based disparities are persistent and critical issues in journalism, affecting women journalists disproportionately in many contexts (García-Mingo, 2019; Hanitzsch and Hanusch, 2025), gender did not emerge as a significant predictor of PTSD severity or as a moderating variable in our specific model and sample. This finding does not diminish the fundamental importance of gender as a social determinant of journalists’ safety and well-being, as it is pointed out by Bashri et al. (2025). Rather, in our study it may reflect the characteristics of our sample—veteran journalists operating in high-risk conflict zones—where the extreme and shared nature of occupational stressors (revictimization, precarious contracts) could have a homogenizing effect on psychological outcomes, overriding other demographic differences (Backholm, 2012; Monteiro et al., 2015). Future research should continue to investigate the intersection of gender, specific forms of victimization, and organizational culture to fully understand its role in the mental health of conflict journalists.

The Study 2 moderate mediation model identified that revictimization operates as a central factor in PTSD, consistent with findings on accumulated experience (Feinstein et al., 2014). This effect manifests in two ways, albeit with nuances: direct and indirect effects mediated by emotional suppression. Study 1 vividly illustrates journalists maladaptive strategies described as ‘locking up’ their emotions, ‘not wanting to worry the family’ or feigning normality (“I’m coming back with complete normality, if not, I wouldn’t go”). Suppression, quantified in Study 2, is an active and exhausting effort to comply with a professional culture that penalizes vulnerability.

Our findings, supporting Hypotheses 2 and 3, highlight emotional suppression as a potential mechanism linking revictimization and PTSD, particularly under conditions of employment precarity. This aligns with previous research suggesting that journalists working in contexts that discourage vulnerability often rely on emotional inhibition strategies to maintain professional performance (Hughes et al., 2021). In the present study, the relationship between revictimization and PTSD appears to be influenced by organizational structures that normalize emotional suppression and offer limited institutional support, which may exacerbate psychological distress. Although such avoidant strategies can be functional in the short term, they are associated with higher negative affect and elevated PTSD symptomatology.

Our main contribution lies in demonstrating how working conditions intensify (critically moderate) these relationships; and how precariousness enhances the harmful role of emotional suppression. Study 2 found the indirect effect (revictimization → emotional suppression → PTSD) significant specifically in contexts of job insecurity. Study 1 journalists point at the lack of institutional support (“No one has asked me ‘Do you feel good?'”), contractual insecurity, and the absence of protocols as breeding grounds where suppression is the only coping tool available for professional life. Previous research had signalled the negative relationship between work factors such as job dissatisfaction, demands at work, or organizational stressors, and psychological well-being (Monteiro et al., 2015), or even an increased risk of post-traumatic stress (MacDonald et al., 2022).

A counterintuitive finding is the direct effect of revictimization on journalists with stable contracts but no days off. This suggests that contractual stability alone is insufficient to mitigate the impact of trauma, unless it is accompanied by active care policies. Qualitative accounts show that, although stable at work, journalists may face greater workload and continuous performance expectations: “they cannot stop”; which exacerbates the cumulative revictimization effect.

These findings point to a structural responsibility: while a personal ethic of care, solidarity and individual strategies for self-regulation can be empowering, they exist within, and are often overwhelmed by, the structural constraints identified in our model. Relying solely on individual resilience or self-care practices risks pathologizing the response to systemic failures and shifting the burden of well-being onto journalists themselves (Koster et al., 2022). Therefore, the primary implication remains for employers and institutions; to create environments where such personal ethics can flourish through structural support, normalized psychological resources, and a culture that actively values care over relentless performance (Williams and Cartwright, 2021).

While limitations remain—particularly sample size and generalizability—our model explains nearly half the variance in PTSD, underscoring its explanatory power in a highly variable field. The universe of journalists covering the conflict in Spain is very small, which limits the generalizability of results. Likewise, the cross-sectional and correlational nature of study 2 prevents the establishment of definitive causal relationships. Although the moderate mediation model explains a high percentage of the variance, being considered very relevant in a field that presents high variability and requires multifactorial models (Rucker et al., 2011), the route between revictimization and emotional suppression was not significant. There may be other mediating mechanisms that better explain how revictimization leads to PTSD. Future research will expand the model to include additional mediators, but the present findings already offer actionable insights: the need to destigmatize trauma, normalizing open dialogue about journalists’ mental health, as well as the urgency of implementing return protocols that include rest days and access to psychological evaluations; develop a culture of occupational safety where the latent risks of exposure to trauma are not enhanced by the precarious conditions of journalists and by the organizational abandonment of the media that hire them.

The synthesis of these two studies facilitates a multifaceted comprehension of trauma in the context of conflict journalism. Study 1 revealed narratives of institutional vulnerability, emotional stigma, and avoidant coping, which Study 2 quantified and modelled statistically. Collectively, these findings underscore the notion that trauma is not merely a consequence of exposure to violent events; rather, it is compounded by precarious working conditions and a paucity of post-mission support. This methodological integration is a response to previous calls (e.g., Smith et al., 2015) to address multiple risk factors simultaneously and in context.

Trauma is not an inevitable collateral damage of conflict journalism. It is a structural problem result of a complex interaction between exposure to risk, individual coping strategies and, crucially, precarious or unsupported work structures. Overcoming the previous fragmented research approaches, this mixed methodology offers a nuanced and powerful understanding of the problem, and provides evidence and impetus for media organizations, policymakers, and educators to integrate trauma literacy, rest measures, and sustained psychological support into their practices. The contribution of this article lies in offering not only prevalence data, but also a clear mechanism for how structural precarity exacerbates trauma—an advance with implications for journalism, in Spain, and beyond.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the valuable contribution of the journalists who participated in this study. We are particularly grateful to those who took part in the in-depth interviews and those who completed the questionnaire. Their engagement and insights were indispensable to the development of this research.

ORCID iDs

Leire Iturregui-Mardaras

Joan Ramón Rodríguez-Amat

Ethical considerations

This research received ethical approval from the Ethics Committee of the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU) for both studies: Report M10_2022_78 for the project Profile, working conditions and safety of Spanish conflict journalists (involving in-depth interviews), and Certificate CE_2024_005 for the project Safety conditions of Spanish journalists covering conflicts: defining elements and analysis of their safety before, during and after coverage (JOSAFCON, PID2021-122,680NB-I00), which complied with all ethical and legal requirements regarding voluntariness, privacy, and anonymity in research using an anonymous questionnaire.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities [PID2021-122680NB-I00, MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and FEDER, EU], the University of the Basque Country [POSTUPV24/26], the Basque Government [Predoctoral Research Training Program, 2019/2020 call], the Type A Research Group Bitartez [IT1771-22, UPV/EHU] and the Regional Ministry of Education of the Government of Castile and León to the SIQoL research group (BU039G24).

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

Databases and analyses available on OSF: .

Author biographies

Leire Iturregui-Mardaras is an Associate Professor in the Department of Journalism at the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU). Her research focuses on journalism in conflict settings, with particular attention to journalists’ safety, as well as institutional communication and gender and media. She is a member of the Bitartez research group recognised as type A, excellent, in the Basque University System. She currently co-leads the national research project JOSAFCON (PID2021-122680NB-I00, 2022–2026), funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, which examines the safety of journalists covering conflict and high-risk environments. She has participated in competitive research projects funded by the European Commission, the Spanish Government and the Basque Government, and has been a visiting researcher at LMU Munich and a visiting lecturer at Sorbonne Nouvelle. She has supervised several PhD theses and her work has been published in peer-reviewed international journals. Before joining academia, she worked as a journalist and as a communication officer.

Annette Unda Endemaño holds a PhD in Social Communication from the University of the Basque Country (EHU). She completed her doctoral studies with a grant from the Basque Government between 2020 and 2023. She is currently a lecturer in the Department of Journalism at the EHU and a researcher in communication and journalism, specialising in the study of conflict journalism and the working and safety conditions of Spanish war correspondents. She has participated in the JOSAFCON (Journalists’ Safety in Armed Conflict) research project, funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation (PID2021-122680NB-I00), MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and FEDER, EU. Her work to date combines qualitative methodologies and empirical analysis to explore the professional profiles of journalists in contexts of war and tension, as well as issues related to corporate communication and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Pablo Castro-Abril. Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU). He holds a PhD in Psychology with Cum Laude honors from the University of the Basque Country (thesis defense: April 25, 2023). He graduated in Psychology from Pontificia Universidad Javeriana in Bogotá, Colombia, and earned a Master’s degree in Psychology: Individual, Group, Organizational, and Cultural from the University of the Basque Country, Spain. Over the past decade, his research trajectory has focused on political psychology, addressing areas related to peacebuilding, collective violence, and armed conflicts. Specifically, his work has explored the significance of intergroup processes of forgiveness and social reconciliation, as well as the active role of direct victims of violence in transitional justice processes. He is currently developing a project focused on empowerment and collective action aimed at strengthening outgroup solidarity among historically vulnerable groups in Latin America and Spain.

Silvia Ubillos Landa is Full Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Burgos, where she leads the Area of Social Psychology and holds responsibilities within the Doctoral School. She is a member of the Social Inclusion and Quality of Life (SIQoL) Research Group. She has developed a consolidated line of research focused on emotion regulation in contexts of vulnerability, examining how individuals cope with and transform highly impactful life experiences. From a psychosocial and applied perspective, she has studied these processes in women survivors of gender-based violence, individuals diagnosed with multiple sclerosis or cancer, and journalists covering armed conflicts, with a focus on coping and quality of life, with implications for psychosocial intervention and public policy. She is the author of 130 scientific publications and has received four research awards, establishing herself as a leading scholar in emotional processes in contexts of adversity and conflict.

Dr. Joan Ramon Rodriguez-Amat,- works at the European Audiovisual Observatory of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg since March 2026; before that, he was Senior Lecturer in the School of Information, Journalism, and Communication at the University of Sheffield (UK); Research and Innovation Lead at Sheffield Hallam University (UK); Postdoctoral assistant at the University of Vienna (A); PhD at the Universitat Autonoma Barcelona (UAB). He counts with a track of impactful international research project collaborations (Germany, Austria, UK, and Spain), and an extensive publication record for his research on communicative spaces, with a triple focus on media governance, cultural production and democratic debates; communities and identity; and the geopolitics of communication technologies.

María José Cantalapiedra is a professor of Journalism at the University of the Basque Country, with a solid track record in teaching, research and academic management. Since 2016, she has been the Principal Investigator of the Bitartez Research Group, recognised as type A, excellent, in the Basque University System. Author of more than 80 academic publications, she has led 13 competitive research projects and supervised 20 doctoral theses. She has also promoted agreements with international universities and relevant media outlets. Co-author of the EiTB Style Book and co-founder of the spin-off LABAK, focused on innovation in communication, she has signed the ‘ConBocare’ technology licence. She is also the director of the EHU-El Correo Master’s Degree in Multimedia Journalism. Her lines of research are part of the research tradition in the field of journalism, which seeks comprehensive studies of the logic of news production, aimed at providing citizens with accurate and reliable information with which to form their own criteria for making decisions.

References

Aoki

Malcolm

Yamaguchi

, et al. (2012) Mental illness among journalists: prevalence, risk factors and protective strategies. Psychiatric Services 63(4): 383–389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764012437676

Backholm

(2012) Work-Related Crisis Exposure: Psychological Trauma and PTSD in News Journalists. Turku, Finland: Åbo Akademi University. https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/84817/backholm_klas.pdf?sequence=2

Bashri

Walcott

Guta

(2025) ‘You’re on your own baby’: sudanese women bridging conflict, journalism, j’activism, and media (in)visibility. Media, War & Conflict 17506352251344034. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/17506352251344034

Buchanan

Keats

(2011) Coping with traumatic stress in journalism: a critical ethnographic study. International Journal of Psychology 46(2): 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.532799

CFOM, Centre for Freedom of the Media (2025) Literature Database: media freedom, journalism safety and impunity [online database]. University of Sheffield. Available at: https://cfom.org.uk/database/

Cividanes

Mello

(2019) Revictimization as a high-risk factor for development of posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review. Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry 41: 82–89. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-4446-2017-0013

Cottle

Sambrook

Mosdell

(2016) Reporting Dangerously: Journalist Killings, Intimidation and Security. Springer.

Cramer

(2002) We have a long way to go. In: Danieli

(ed) Sharing the Frontline and the Back Hills. Routledge, pp. 275–280. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315223742

Dworznik

(2006) Journalism and trauma: how reporters and photographers make sense of what they see. Journalism Studies 7(4): 534–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700600757977

10.

Dworznik

(2011) Factors contributing to PTSD and compassion fatigue in television news workers. International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology 1(1): 22–32. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Factors-Contributing-to-PTSD-and-Compassion-Fatigue-Dworznik/1fb20df50ef12ac0ce9c0bcc0853c9b1308dba56#citing-papers

11.

Echeburúa

Amor

Sarasua

, et al. (2016) Escala de Gravedad de Síntomas Revisada (EGS-R) del Trastorno de Estrés Postraumático según el DSM-5: propiedades psicométricas. Terapia Psicologica 34(2): 111–128. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48082016000200004

12.

Etura

Martín Sánchez

(2022) Situación de los periodistas españoles en Ucrania y fronteras (Situation of Spanish journalists in Ukraine and borders). Reporters Without Borders. https://www.rsf-es.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Informe-RSF-Espana.pdf

13.

Feinstein

Osmann

(2023) Predictors of psychological distress in frontline journalists: common denominators across three decades of conflicts. Traumatology 30(3): 306–313. https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000445

14.

Feinstein

Owen

Blair

(2002) A hazardous profession: war, journalists, and psychopathology. American Journal of Psychiatry 159(9): 1570–1575. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.1570

15.

Feinstein

Audet

Waknine

(2014) Witnessing images of extreme violence: a psychological study of journalists in the newsroom. JRSM Open 5(8): 2054270414533323. https://doi.org/10.1177/2054270414533323

16.

Feinstein

Osmann

Patel

(2018) Symptoms of PTSD in frontline journalists: a retrospective examination of 18 years of war and conflict. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 63(9): 629–635. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743718777396

17.

Flores Morales

Souza Colín

Oviedo Mireles

, et al. (2016) Estrés Traumático Secundario (ETS) en Periodistas Mexicanos y Defensores de Derechos Humanos' (Secondary Traumatic Stress (STS) in Mexican Journalists and Defenders of the Human Rights). Summa Psicologica 13(1): 101–111. https://doi.org/10.18774/448x.2016.13.290

18.

García-Mingo

(2019) Women journalists’ careers in Spain: the case of war correspondents. Comparative Sociology 18(3): 302–326. https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341498

19.

Hallin

Mancini

(2004) Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

20.

Hanitzsch

Hanusch

(2025). In: Slavtcheva-Petkova

(ed) Journalism Under Duress: Worlds of Journalism Study Report (Wave 3: 2021-2025). Munich: WJS Center. https://doi.org/10.5282/ubm/epub.128812

21.

Harrison

Maynard

Torsner

(2020) Strengthening the monitoring of violations against journalists through an events-based methodology. Media and Communication 8(1): 89–100. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i1.2543

22.

Hayes

(2018) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach (Methodology in the Social Sciences) 2nd edi. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

23.

Hughes

Iesue

De Ortega Bárcenas

, et al. (2021) Coping with occupational stress in journalism: professional identities and advocacy as resources. Journalism Studies 22(8): 971–991. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1910543

24.

Idås

Backholm

Korhonen

(2019) Trauma in the newsroom: social support, post-traumatic stress and post-traumatic growth among journalists working with terror. European Journal of Psychotraumatology 10(1): 1620085. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2019.1620085

25.

Iturregui Mardaras

Cantalapiedra González

Moure Peñín

(2017) Safety training for journalists: a case study with the Spanish military. Journalism Educator 6(2): 56–64.

26.

Ivask

Waschková Císařová

Lon

(2024) “When can I get angry?” Journalists’ coping strategies and emotional management in hostile situations. Journalism 25(10): 2099–2116. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231199895

27.

Koster

Koot

Malik

, et al. (2022) Associations among traumatic experiences, threat exposure, and mental health among Pakistani journalists. Journal of Traumatic Stress 35(2): 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22720

28.

Lisosky

Henrichsen

(2009) Don't shoot the messenger: prospects for protecting journalists in conflict situations. Media, War & Conflict 2(2): 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635209104651

29.

MacDonald

Hodgins

Saliba

(2017) Trauma exposure in journalists: a systematic literature review. Fusion Journal 11: 34–44. https://www.fusion-journal.com/issue/011-dangerous-journalism/trauma-exposure-in-journalists-a-systematic-literature-review/

30.

MacDonald

Dale

Metcalf

, et al. (2022) Symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder in journalist samples: a systematic literature review. Traumatology 28(4): 415–430. https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000337

31.

Miller

(2025) “I empathize with them”: how newsroom leadership assesses mental health and hostility toward their journalists. Digital Journalism August: 1–19. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2025.2548795

32.

Monteiro

Marques Pinto

Roberto

(2015) Job demands, coping, and impacts of occupational stress among journalists: a systematic review. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology 25(5): 751–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2015.1114470

33.

Newman

Simpson

Handschuh

(2003) Trauma exposure and post‐traumatic stress disorder among photojournalists. Visual Communication Quarterly 10(1): 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551390309363497

34.

Obermaier

Wiedicke

Steindl

, et al. (2023) Reporting trauma: conflict journalists’ exposure to potentially traumatizing events, short- and long-term consequences, and coping behavior. Journalism Studies 24(11): 1398–1417. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2023.2216808

35.

Ogunyemi

Price

(2023) Introduction: trauma literacy in journalism education. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator 78(2): 107–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958231167530

36.

Olajide Talabi

Okunade

Talabi

, et al. (2024) Effectiveness of art therapy in reducing post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms and the propensity to quit journalism among journalists covering banditry activities in Nigeria. Media, War & Conflict 17(4): 445–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/17506352231225344

37.

Osmann

Dvorkin

Inbar

, et al. (2021) The emotional well-being of journalists exposed to traumatic events: a mapping review. Media, War & Conflict 14(4): 476–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635219895998

38.

Palau-Sampio

López-García

(2025) Disruption in the information industry: precariousness and professional “decapitalisation”. In: Palau-Sampio

López-García

(eds) News, Media, and Communication in a Polarized World. Cham: Springer Nature, pp. 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-86620-3_7

39.

Puente-Martínez

Páez

Ubillos-Landa

, et al. (2018) Examining the structure of negative affect regulation and its association with hedonic and psychological wellbeing. Frontiers in Psychology 9: 1592. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01592

40.

Pyevich

Newman

Daleiden

(2003) The relationship among cognitive schemas, job-related traumatic exposure, and posttraumatic stress disorder in journalists. Journal of Traumatic Stress 16(4): 325–328. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024405716529

41.

Rucker

Preacher

Tormala

, et al. (2011) Mediation analysis in social psychology: current practices and new recommendations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 5(6): 359–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00355.x

42.

Shapiro

Newman

Slaughter

(2017) Journalists and safety training: experiences and opinions. Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7916/d8-q5s2-r614

43.

Shih

Fan

(2009) Comparing response rates in e-mail and paper surveys: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review 4(1): 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.01.003

44.

Slavtcheva-Petkova

Ramaprasad

Springer

, et al. (2023) Conceptualizing journalists’ safety around the globe. Digital Journalism 11(7): 1211–1229. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2162429

45.

Smith

Newman

Drevo

, et al. (2015) Covering trauma: impact on journalists. Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma. https://dartcenter.org/content/covering-trauma-imact-on-journalists (Accessed September 2024).

46.

Smith

Drevo

Newman

(2017) Covering traumatic news stories: factors associated with post-traumatic stress disorder among journalists. Stress and Health 34(2): 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2775

47.

Taylor

Bogdan

DeVault

(2016) Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: A Guidebook and Resource. John Wiley & Sons.

48.

Tejedor

Cervi

Tusa

(2020) Perception of journalists reporting in conflict zones: labour situation, working conditions and main challenges in information coverage in contexts of violence. Media, War & Conflict 15(4): 530–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635220971004

49.

Tenore

(2012) How journalists train to stay safe while covering hostile environments. Poynter. https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2012/how-journalists-train-to-cover-hostile-environments/

50.

Thomson

(2021) Mapping the emotional labor and work of visual journalism. Journalism 22(4): 956–973. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918799227

51.

Unda

(2023) Udaberri arabiarra aztergai: Espainiar gatazka kazetarien profilaren eta lan zein segurtasun baldintzen inguruko analisia [The Arab Spring: An analysis of the profile and working and safety conditions of Spanish conflict journalists]. University of the Basque Country EHU. Doctoral thesis.

52.

Unda-Endemaño

Iturregui-Mardaras

Cantalapiedra-González

(2022) La Tribu sin Suerte. Transformaciones y retos del periodismo de conflicto en España. Cuadernos. Info(53): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.7764/cdi.53.42963

53.

UNESCO (2012) UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity. Paris: UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/un-plan-action-safety-journalists

54.

UNESCO (2022) Academic Consultation Report and Recommendations: 10Th Anniversary of the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000383910

55.

Weiss

(2025) Beyond retraumatization: trauma-informed political science research. British Journal of Political Science 55: e82. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123424000620

56.

Westlund

Krøvel

Orgeret

(2024) Journalism and Safety. Abingdon: Routledge. Taylor & Francis.

57.

Williams

Cartwright

(2021) Post-traumatic stress, personal risk and post-traumatic growth among UK journalists. European Journal of Psychotraumatology 12(1): 1881727. https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2021.1881727