Cited by 67Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthDeath, Funerary Practices, and MourningReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

Prolonged grief and the disruption of meaning: Establishing a mediation model

Milman, Evgenia, Neimeyer, Robert A., Fitzpatrick, Marilyn, MacKinnon, Christopher J., Muis, Krista R., Cohen, S. Robin·2019·Journal of Counseling Psychology

Abstract

This study aimed to test the hypothesis that meaning making is a mediating process in the relationship between risk factors for prolonged grief disorder (PGD) and subsequent emergence of PGD symptomatology. A survey design was employed with prospective measurement of PGD. The following variables were assessed 2-12 months postloss among adults across North America and Europe (N = 357): (a) risk factors for PGD (insecure attachment, social support, neuroticism, violent loss, and spousal loss) and (b) meaning made. Meaning made was measured using the Grief and Meaning Reconstruction Inventory (GMRI) as well as using the Integration of Stressful Life Experiences-Short Form (ISLES-SF). At a 7-10-months follow-up (n = 171) symptoms of PGD were assessed. The mean age at the second assessment point was 44.3 years (SD = 16.1) and the majority of the sample identified as female (71.9%). Process analysis was employed to test a series of simple mediation models. When the GMRI was used as a measure of meaning, the indirect effect of each risk factor on PGD symptoms, as mediated by meaning made, was significant (95% CI). When the ISLES-SF was used to measure meaning, the indirect effect of each risk factor with the exception of violent loss was significant (95% CI). The study demonstrates that meaning making serves to mediate the adverse impact of multiple PGD risk factors on the development of PGD symptomatology. Specifically, the study suggests that PGD risk factors exacerbate symptoms of PGD by impeding the meaning-making process. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/cou0000370

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Milman, E., Neimeyer, R. A., Fitzpatrick, M., MacKinnon, C. J., Muis, K. R., & Cohen, S. R.
Venue
Journal of Counseling Psychology
Published
2019-11
Volume
66
Issue
6
Pages
714-725
ISSN
  • 0022-0167 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2168
OpenAlex
W2981889148
Cited by
67
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
10.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Counseling 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 › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
prolonged grief disorder, meaning-making, mediation, risk factors, insecure attachment, social support, neuroticism, death of a spouse, bereavement, grief
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Grief, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Time Factors, Negotiating

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