Cited by 75Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

The centrality of a loss and its role in emotional problems among bereaved people

Boelen, Paul A.·2009·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

In literature on posttraumatic stress-disorder (PTSD) there is growing interest in the concept "centrality of event", referring to the degree to which the memory of a traumatic event is central to one's everyday inferences, life-story, and identity. Using self-reported data from 254 bereaved individuals, this study examined the centrality of the loss-event in emotional problems following loss. Findings showed that this centrality (a) varied as a function of kinship to the deceased but not other loss-related variables, (b) was correlated with complicated grief (CG), depression, PTSD, and with neuroticism and several cognitive-behavioural variables, and (c) remained correlated with CG but not depression and PTSD when controlling for the shared variance between these symptoms, neuroticism, and these cognitive-behavioural variables.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2009.03.009

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Multiple types of loss-related avoidance assessed with one generic measure show large positive concurrent and longitudinal associations with complicated grief symptoms.

    “Other investigations, assessing multiple types of lossrelated avoidance (mostly experiential) with one generic measure and CG symptoms, demonstrated large positive associations between these constructs concurrently and longitudinally (Boelen, 2009; Boelen, 2010a; Boelen & Klugkist, 2011; Boelen, van den Bout, & van den Hout, 2006).”

    From Emotion Regulatory Strategies in Complicated Grief: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as Boelen, 2009

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boelen, P. A.
Affiliations
Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Boelen, Paul A.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-07
Volume
47
Issue
7
Pages
616-622
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2062562658
Cited by
75
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
7.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
loss, bereavement, complicated grief, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, neuroticism, kinship
MeSH terms
Adult, Affective Symptoms, Bereavement, Depression, Female, Grief, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personality, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Mental Recall, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review