In recent years, the psychological consequences of prolonged captivity have garnered increasing attention from the scientific community, especially in regions marred by conflict and political unrest. A groundbreaking qualitative study conducted by Levkovich, Elyoseph, and Shinan-Altman provides profound insight into the coping mechanisms employed by civilian abductees in Gaza after their release. Published in BMC Psychology in 2025, this research delves deep into the resilient human spirit, revealing how individuals navigate the psychological aftermath of abduction and captivity under extreme adversity.
This comprehensive examination offers a nuanced understanding of the varied strategies adopted by individuals to cope with the trauma of captivity. Captivity, by its very nature, disrupts a person’s sense of control, autonomy, and safety, all of which are foundational to mental well-being. The researchers embarked on a qualitative journey, engaging with those formerly held hostage to uncover personal narratives, coping patterns, and psychological frameworks developed during and after their imprisonment. The qualitative methodology allowed for an empathetic exploration of lived experiences, unearthing themes that are often sidelined in quantitative analyses.
One of the central technical challenges addressed in this study is differentiating between adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies. Adaptive coping refers to methods that effectively mitigate psychological distress and enhance resilience, while maladaptive strategies may provide temporary relief but ultimately exacerbate mental health issues. Through extensive interviews, thematic coding, and narrative analysis, Levkovich and colleagues identified several core adaptive strategies, including cognitive reframing, social support reliance, and spiritual or religious engagement. Each of these mechanisms contributes differently to the individual’s reconstruction of self and reality post-captivity.
Cognitive reframing emerged as a particularly salient strategy in the aftermath of captivity. This involves altering one’s perception of traumatic events to foster a sense of meaning or purpose, thereby reducing feelings of helplessness. In the context of Gaza’s civilian abductees, many interviewees described how reframing their experiences as tests of endurance, lessons in patience, or even spiritual trials enabled them to regain psychological balance. This form of reinterpretation is supported by cognitive-behavioral theory, which emphasizes the power of cognition in shaping emotional responses and behavioral outcomes.
Social support was another cornerstone highlighted in the study, underscoring the human need for connection amidst isolation. The abductees consistently referenced the importance of reconnecting with family, friends, and community upon release. Social bonds serve as a crucial buffer against the deleterious effects of trauma, facilitating emotional validation, shared experience, and practical assistance. The researchers propose that community reintegration programs in conflict zones should prioritize strengthening these social networks to promote mental health recovery.
Religious and spiritual coping mechanisms also feature prominently in the abductees’ narratives. In regions like Gaza, where faith often intertwines with cultural identity, spirituality provides both solace and framework for interpreting suffering. The participants conveyed how prayer, religious rituals, and belief in divine justice or protection helped them endure captivity’s psychological strain. This form of coping aligns with previously established psychological models that recognize spirituality as a vital resource in trauma resilience, especially in areas of persistent instability.
Beyond identifying coping mechanisms, the study sheds light on the complexity of psychological sequelae post-captivity. Many individuals grapple with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, and feelings of alienation. The research emphasizes that while some abductees exhibit remarkable resilience, others remain vulnerable, highlighting the heterogeneous nature of trauma response. Importantly, these findings call for personalized mental health interventions tailored to individual coping styles and symptom profiles rather than one-size-fits-all approaches.
Methodologically, the study offers rigorous qualitative rigor by incorporating in-depth interviews conducted in culturally sensitive environments, ensuring participant comfort and openness. The analytical framework was grounded in phenomenological psychology, which seeks to understand human experiences from the subjective perspective of those involved. This approach is particularly suited to trauma research, where empirical data is enriched by emotional and cognitive dimensions that defy simple quantification.
The researchers also grappled with ethical considerations throughout their work. Partnering with local organizations and mental health professionals, they ensured confidentiality, informed consent, and psychological support during and after data collection. Engaging with individuals who have endured captivity presents unique challenges, including retraumatization risk, which the research team proactively managed by prioritizing participant well-being over extraction of data.
This study situates itself within a broader discourse on war-related trauma and human rights violations, emphasizing the urgency of addressing psychological dimensions alongside physical liberation. The authors argue that releasing abductees without adequate mental health support is an incomplete solution that leaves survivors vulnerable to long-term psychological distress and social marginalization. This insight aligns with global mental health initiatives that advocate for integrative trauma-informed care in post-conflict settings.
Perhaps most compelling is the study’s illumination of human agency amidst despair. By focusing on coping strategies rather than symptomatology alone, Levkovich and colleagues portray abductees as active agents in their recovery, challenging narratives that depict them solely as passive victims. This reframing fosters hope and highlights pathways for therapeutic interventions that empower survivors to reconstruct their lives meaningfully.
The implications for policy and practice are substantial. Mental health practitioners working in Gaza and similar contexts must incorporate culturally congruent modalities that leverage local strengths, such as faith-based resources and communal ties. Furthermore, the authors advocate for implementation of psychosocial rehabilitation programs that integrate narrative therapy, group support, and community engagement to facilitate holistic healing.
Future research directions include longitudinal studies to track the evolution of coping mechanisms and mental health trajectories over time. Understanding how coping strategies shift or solidify years after release can inform preventive strategies against chronic psychopathology. Additionally, comparative studies examining different abductee populations across geopolitical contexts could refine understanding of cultural and environmental influences on trauma recovery.
In conclusion, Levkovich, Elyoseph, and Shinan-Altman’s study constitutes a seminal contribution to trauma psychology and conflict research. Its empathetic, detailed exploration of coping in civilian abductees not only advances academic knowledge but also delivers actionable insights for mental health care providers, policymakers, and humanitarian actors striving to support survivors of captivity. This research poignantly reminds us of the enduring strength of the human psyche and the critical importance of comprehensive approaches to trauma recovery in zones of conflict.
Subject of Research: Psychological coping strategies of released civilian abductees in Gaza
Article Title: Coping strategies during captivity: a qualitative study on released civilian abductees in Gaza
Article References:
Levkovich, I., Elyoseph, Z. & Shinan-Altman, S. Coping strategies during captivity: a qualitative study on released civilian abductees in Gaza. BMC Psychol 13, 883 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03183-0
Image Credits: AI Generated
