The relationship between shame, self-discrepancies and adjustment after an acquired brain injury, and if peer support groups can help

This portfolio thesis comprises of three parts: a systematic literature review, an empirical paper, and the corresponding appendices.Part one consists of a systematic literature review tasked with examining the evidence for the use of peer support groups within acquired brain injury. The studies included varied considerably across a range of factors including: type of acquired brain injury, group setting, structure, and duration. As such, whilst the findings were generally in support of the use of peer support groups, it is difficult to make reliable conclusions about how these can most effectively function and be used.Part two is comprised of an empirical paper which investigated the relationship between shame and self-discrepancies as predictors of adjustment following an acquired brain injury, using quantitative methodology to interpret participants’ responses on a range of self-report measures. The results suggested that shame and the pre-injury vs post-injury self-discrepancy predict adjustment following an acquired brain injury. Additionally, the paper provides further evidence for the presence of both shame, and self-discrepancies between the pre-injury self and post-injury self, and post-injury self and ideal self, after an acquired brain injury.Part three contains the accompanying appendices for the previous two sections