Cited by 100Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthMental Health via WritingDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

Effects of directed written disclosure on grief and distress symptoms among bereaved individuals

Open access
Lichtenthal, Wendy G., Cruess, Dean G.·2010·Death Studies

Abstract

Bereavement-specific written disclosure trials have generally demonstrated null effects, but these studies have not directed the focus of writing. This randomized controlled trial compared directed writing that focused on either sense-making or benefit-finding, both associated with adjustment to loss, to traditional, non-directed emotional disclosure and a control condition. Bereaved undergraduates (n = 68) completed three 20-min writing sessions over 1 week. Intervention effects were found on prolonged grief disorder, depressive, and posttraumatic stress symptoms 3 months postintervention, and the benefit-finding condition appeared particularly efficacious. Physical health improved over time in all treatment groups. Findings suggested that directing written disclosure on topics associated with adjustment to bereavement may be useful for grieving individuals.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07481187.2010.483332

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • An RCT by Lichtenthal and Cruess (2010) showed that increasing finding benefits in the loss decreased complicated grief symptoms more strongly than a waitlist.

    “Causal evidence was found in an RCT by Lichtenthal and Cruess (2010), who showed that increasing finding benefits in the loss decreased CG symptoms more strongly than a waitlist.”

    From Emotion Regulatory Strategies in Complicated Grief: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as Lichtenthal and Cruess (2010)

    The Results (Written Disclosure Effects at Follow-Up; page unavailable) report a significant difference in prolonged-grief symptom change across groups, with particularly pronounced reductions in the benefit-finding writing group. But the Method (Procedure; page unavailable) identifies the comparator as a neutral-writing group, not a waitlist. The study tested instructions to write about positive changes after loss; it does not establish that an increase in benefit finding itself caused the symptom reduction. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Affleck G Tennen H Construing benefits from adversity: Adaptational significance and dispositional underpinnings Journal of Personality 1996 64 899 922 8956517

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lichtenthal, W. G., & Cruess, D. G.
Affiliations
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
  • University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
Lichtenthal, Wendy G.
Venue
Death Studies
Published
2010-05-27
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
475-499
ISSN
  • 0748-1187 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-7683
OpenAlex
W2088533078
Cited by
100
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
7.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Death Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (F31MH071999)
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA008748, T32CA009461)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
bereavement, grief, written disclosure, expressive writing, benefit finding, sensemaking, prolonged grief disorder, depressive symptoms, posttraumatic stress symptoms, adaptation to loss, physical health, undergraduate students
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Bereavement, Depression, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Grief, Health Status, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Stress, Psychological, Students, Writing, Treatment Outcome, Disclosure, Young Adult

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