Cited by 215Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthDeath, Funerary Practices, and MourningDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

Continuing bonds and adjustment at 5 years after the death of a spouse

Field, Nigel P., Gal-Oz, Eval, Bonanno, George A.·2003·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

Thirty-nine bereaved individuals completed the Continuing Bonds Scale (CBS), assessing various aspects of the ongoing attachment to the deceased, at 60 months postloss in a longitudinal conjugal bereavement study. They also completed symptom measures at 6, 14, 25, and 60 months postloss. Higher CBS scores were associated with a more elevated grief-specific symptom pattern over the 5-year postloss period. Moreover, those who expressed greater helplessness and less blame toward the deceased during a monologue role-play involving their deceased spouse at 6 months postloss had higher CBS scores. Finally, greater satisfaction in the past relationship with the spouse was predictive of higher CBS scores. The results were discussed in relation to existing literature on the adaptiveness of continuing bonds.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-006x.71.1.110

Cites

41 of 41 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?

  • Loss-related approach behaviors (e.g., proximity seeking to the deceased) may paradoxically serve to avoid the reality of the loss.

    “Relatedly, loss-related approach behaviors (e.g., proximity seeking to the deceased) may paradoxically serve to avoid the reality of the loss (cf. Field, Gal-Oz, & Bonanno, 2003)”

    From Emotion Regulatory Strategies in Complicated Grief: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as Field, Gal-Oz, & Bonanno, 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Field, N. P., Gal-Oz, E., & Bonanno, G. A.
Affiliations
Columbia University (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2003
Volume
71
Issue
1
Pages
110-117
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2060113516
Cited by
215
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 14
FWCI
8.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Keywords
continuing bonds, conjugal bereavement, death of a spouse, grief, bereavement adjustment, helplessness, relationship satisfaction, role play
MeSH terms
Adult, Bereavement, Death, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Object Attachment, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Adjustment

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