CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 214Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthIdentity, Memory, and TherapyDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 142 of the 142 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Cognitive Attachment Model of prolonged grief: Integrating attachments, memory, and identity

Maccallum, Fiona, Bryant, Richard A.·2013·Clinical Psychology Review
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2013.05.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Prolonged grief (PG), otherwise known as complicated grief, has attracted much attention in recent years as a potentially debilitating condition that affects approximately 10% of bereaved people. We propose a model of PG that integrates processes of attachment, self-identity, and autobiographical memory. The paper commences with a discussion of the PG construct and reviews current evidence regarding the distinctiveness of PG from other bereavement related-outcomes. We then review the evidence regarding the dysfunctional attachments, appraisals, and coping styles that people with PG display. Recent evidence pertaining to the patterns of autobiographical memory in PG is described in the context of the self-memory system. This system provides a unifying framework to understand the roles of personal memories, identity, attachments, and coping responses in PG. The proposed model places emphasis on how one's sense of identity influences yearning, memories of the deceased, appraisals, and coping strategies, to maintain a focus on the loss. The model is discussed in relation to existing models of PG. The potential for shaping treatment strategies to shift perceptions of the self is then outlined. Finally, we outline future directions to test propositions stemming from the model and enhance our understanding of the mechanisms underlying PG.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2013.05.001

Cites

142 of 142 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 137 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–214 of 214

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Maccallum, F., & Bryant, R. A.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Maccallum, Fiona
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-08
Volume
33
Issue
6
Pages
713-727
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cpr.2013.05.001
OpenAlex
W1997669167
Cited by
214
References
137
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 9
FWCI
1.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
prolonged grief disorder, complicated grief, bereavement, attachment, self-identity, autobiographical memory, coping strategies, longing, appraisal, grief therapy
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Bereavement, Death, Grief, Humans, Memory, Models, Psychological, Object Attachment

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