Meaning making in the Dual Process Model of coping with bereavement

231 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Traumatic loss and major disasters: strengthening family and community resilience. (2007, background): “Attention commonly oscillates between preoccupation with grief and reengagement in a world forever transformed by loss (Stroebe & Schut, 2001).”
The case for positive emotions in the stress process (2008, background): “However, the process should also provide the basis for a renewed sense of purpose (Stroebe & Schut, 2001).”
The Dual Process Model of Coping with Bereavement: A Decade on (2010, methodology): “The DPM can be understood as a taxonomy to describe ways that people come to terms with the loss of a loved one (for detailed accounts, see Stroebe & Schut, 1999, 2001).”
Attachment in Coping with Bereavement: A Theoretical Integration (2005, methodology): “The DPM was developed because examination of preexisting models of coping with bereavement revealed a number of shortcomings, some of which are relevant to establishing what precisely effective coping is (for a review, see Stroebe & Schut, 2001b).”
Loss, Grief, and the Search for Significance: Toward a Model of Meaning Reconstruction in Bereavement (2006, methodology): “…and Janigian’s (1998) “life schemes,” that inform her or his understanding of the world in six domains: (1) daily activities and priorities (Folkman, 1997; Stroebe & Schut, 2001); (2) their perceptions of themselves and their personal identities (Emmons et al., 1998; Lopata, 1973; Tedeschi et…”