Cited by 27Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthEmotions and Moral BehaviorPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Negative self‐conscious emotion and grief: An actor–partner analysis in couples bereaved by stillbirth or neonatal death

Barr, Peter·2012·Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice

Abstract

Objectives. The purpose of the present study was to examine the intrapersonal (actor) and interpersonal (partner) relationships of personality proneness to negative self‐conscious emotion (shame and guilt) to grief in couples 13 months after a perinatal death. Design. A cohort study using self‐report questionnaire measures of grief, shame, and guilt. Methods. The participants were 63 Australian couples bereaved by stillbirth ( N = 31) or neonatal death ( N = 32). The actor and partner relationships of chronic shame (Personal Feelings Questionnaire‐2), situational shame (Test of Self‐Conscious Affect‐2), and survivor guilt and omnipotence guilt (Interpersonal Guilt Questionnaire‐67) to grief (Perinatal Grief Scale‐33) were explored using the Actor–Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) method of dyadic analysis. Results. The correlations between the self‐conscious emotions and grief were invariably larger in men compared with women. Chronic shame had a significant actor relationship with grief in women and men and a non‐significant partner relationship in both sexes. Situational shame and survivor guilt had significant actor relationships with grief in men and significant partner relationships in women. Omnipotence guilt had a significant linear actor relationship with grief in men and a significant U‐shaped quadratic actor relationship in women. Conclusions. Negative self‐conscious emotions had intrapersonal relationship with grief in men and both intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships with grief in women. A moderate level of omnipotence guilt was associated with lower grief in women. APIM dyadic analysis furthers understanding of the relationship between personality and parental grief following a perinatal death.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.2044-8341.2011.02034.x

Cites

76 of 76 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barr, P.
Affiliations
Children's Hospital at Westmead (AU)
Corresponding author
Barr, Peter
Venue
Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-09-14
Volume
85
Issue
3
Pages
310-326
ISSN
  • 1476-0835 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8341
OpenAlex
W1896630984
Cited by
27
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology and Psychotherapy Theory Research and Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Emotions and Moral Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
grief, perinatal death, stillbirth, neonatal death, survivor guilt, couples, gender differences, parental bereavement
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Australia, Bereavement, Counseling, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Female, Guilt, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Models, Psychological, Parents, Personality, Pregnancy, Sex Characteristics, Shame, Cohort Studies, Survivors, Stillbirth, Self Report

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