CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 36Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

Assessing a Buddhist treatment for bereavement and loss: The Mustard Seed Project

Neimeyer, Robert A., Young-Eisendrath, Polly·2015·Death Studies
DOI 10.1080/07481187.2014.937973
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

From a Buddhist perspective, grief becomes complicated because mourners have trouble accommodating the reality of impermanence in the face of deep and unwelcome change, as they struggle to make sense of the "event story" of their loss and to revise their life story and identity accordingly. Joining this perspective with a constructivist emphasis on grieving as meaning reconstruction, we developed a distinctive group intervention to help people reflect on the natural conditions of impermanence and limitation in a compassionate environment in which they were encouraged to cultivate a new self-narrative in the wake of loss. Integrating meditative interludes, dyadic sharing, dharma lessons, and informal didactics on the human quest for meaning, we used expressive arts exercises to engage the existential dilemmas of loss from a self-distancing perspective. Evidence from an open trial on 41 participants in 2 groups documents that the intervention is both feasible and acceptable to clients, and that they display significant decreases in grief related suffering, and corresponding increases in meaning making and personal growth, across the brief course of the workshop experience.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07481187.2014.937973

Cites

33 of 33 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?

  • Open trials of the meaning reconstruction model with unselected self-referred groups and mourners meeting criteria for PGD have strongly supported the effectiveness of the model.

    “Open trials of the model with both unselected self-referred groups experiencing loss and transition (91) and mourners meeting criterial for PGD (92) have strongly supported the effectiveness of the model”

    From Ayahuasca-assisted meaning reconstruction therapy for grief: a non-randomized clinical trial protocol (2025) · cites this paper as [91]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Neimeyer, R. A., & Young-Eisendrath, P.
Affiliations
University of Memphis (US)
Corresponding author
Neimeyer, Robert A.
ORCID
Neimeyer, Robert A.
Venue
Death Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2014-12-22
Volume
39
Issue
5
Pages
263-273
ISSN
  • 0748-1187 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-7683
DOI
10.1080/07481187.2014.937973
OpenAlex
W2034838362
Cited by
36
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4
FWCI
2.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Death Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
bereavement, loss, group intervention, transience, meaning-making, self-narrative, expressive arts, self-distancing, meditation, dharma, personal growth, feasibility and acceptability
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Art Therapy, Bereavement, Buddhism, Female, Grief, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Middle Aged, Psychological Techniques, Psychotherapy, Group, Religion and Psychology, Stress, Psychological, Treatment Outcome

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