The Death-Anxiety Buffering Function of Close Relationships: Exploring the Effects of Separation Reminders on Death-Thought Accessibility
Abstract
Three studies examined the effects of separation reminders on death-thought accessibility. In Study 1, participants imagined a separation from a relationship partner, the death of such a partner, or a TV program. In Study 2, participants imagined a separation from a relationship partner, a separation from an acquaintance, or an academic failure. In Study 3, participants imagined a short-term, long-term, or final separation from a relationship partner. In the three studies, death-thought accessibility and attachment style were assessed. Thoughts of separation from a relationship partner led to heightened death-thought accessibility mainly when thoughts were focused on long-term or final separations and among persons scoring high on attachment anxiety. The discussion focused on the death-anxiety buffering function of close relationships.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
There is growing evidence for the role of close relationships as a third psychological structure.
“There is growing evidence for the role of close relationships as a third psychological structure (Cox et al., 2012; Florian et al, 2002; Mikulincer et al., 2002; Mikulincer et al., 2003), but we focus on the two substantiated structures due to robust empirical support and their integral role in TMT development.”
From Mortality management and climate action: A review and reference for using Terror Management Theory methods in interdisciplinary environmental research (2022) · cites this paper as Mikulincer et al., 2002
Contemplating the undoing of close relationships leads to enhanced accessibility of death-related thoughts.
“contemplating the undoing of such connections leads to enhanced accessibility of deathrelated thoughts.”
From On Social Death: Ostracism and the Accessibility of Death Thoughts (2015) · cites this paper as Mikulincer et al., 2002
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 39 · Cited by 164
- Authors
- Mikulincer, M., Florian, V., Birnbaum, G., & Malishkevich, S.
- Affiliations
- Bar-Ilan University (IL)
- Bar-Ilan University
- Corresponding author
- Mikulincer, Mario
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-03
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 287-299
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W1968032642
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 13.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
- Keywords
- fear of death, death-thought accessibility, close relationships, attachment styles, attachment anxiety, death of a partner
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
