Cited by 36Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Miscarriage: Is vividness of visual imagery a factor in the grief reaction of the partner?

Johnson, Martin P., Puddifoot, John E.·1998·British Journal of Health Psychology

Abstract

Objectives . In the context of recent findings concerning the unexpressed psychological reactions of men to their partner's miscarriage, this study explores the role of visual imagery in mediating this reaction. Design . Questionnaire data from 158 male partners of women who had miscarried prior to the start of the 25th week of pregnancy were collected with a view to exploring the relation of vividness of visual imagery within this cohort to their subsequent grief response. Methods . Volunteers recruited via referrals from general hospitals and general practices in the North East and Midlands regions of England, were administered the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire, a modified object‐specific form, i.e. the Baby Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire, and the Perinatal Grief Scale. Results . It was found that men with ‘unvivid’ visual imagery were less likely to have seen an ultrasound scan of their unborn child. When men were compared by the length of gestation at which the miscarriage occurred there was not a significant difference in vividness of visual imagery. Those men exhibiting vivid imagery exhibited significantly higher levels of measured grief when their partner miscarried than those of lower or unvivid imagery. Conclusions . These findings suggest that vivid visual imagery assisted or oriented men towards a sense of baby (or perceived foetal ontology) early in pregnancy, and in consequence they appeared at greater risk of negative impact following their partner's miscarriage.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.2044-8287.1998.tb00562.x

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?

  • Ten included studies did not state whether institutional ethical approval had been sought or obtained.

    “However, 10 studies did not state whether institutional ethical approval had been sought or obtained [25, 46, 79, 82, 83, 86, 87, 91, 93, 94].”
  • Thirteen included studies used the Perinatal Grief Scale (PGS) as a primary measure of grief.

    “Although 13 studies used the Perinatal Grief Scale (PGS) as a primary measure of grief”
  • With the exception of one study which employed author-developed measures of grief and support service satisfaction, the remaining quantitative studies employed standardised and validated measures for both predictors and grief.

    “With the exception of one study which employed author-developed measures of grief and support service satisfaction [70] the remaining quantitative studies employed standardised and validated measures for both predictors and grief [23–25, 67, 76, 84, 86–96].”
  • There were mixed findings in terms of overall scale scores across similar studies looking at grief following miscarriage, with Despair (internalised grief) scores higher in men than those for Active Grief (externalised grief) in two studies, and lower in the remaining two.

    “There were mixed findings in terms of overall scale scores across similar studies looking at grief following miscarriage, with Despair (internalised grief) scores higher in men than those for Active Grief (externalised grief) in two studies [87, 95], and lower in the remaining two [91, 96].”
  • Of the 12 quantitative studies that provided raw grief scores for men, outcomes varied considerably both between studies and within them.

    “Of the 12 quantitative studies that provided raw grief scores for men, outcomes varied considerably both between studies and within them [23, 25, 67, 76, 84, 87, 88, 91, 93–96].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Johnson, M. P., & Puddifoot, J. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Wolverhampton (GB)
  • Teesside University (GB)
Corresponding author
Johnson, Martin P.
Venue
British Journal of Health Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-05
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
137-146
ISSN
  • 1359-107X (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8287
OpenAlex
W2046223972
Cited by
36
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
British Journal of Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
miscarriage, perinatal grief, male partners, visual imagery vividness, Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire, ultrasonography, grief reactions

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