Rumination moderates the role of meaning in the development of prolonged grief symptomatology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To address the etiology of prolonged grief disorder (PGD) by examining whether rumination moderates the role of meaning-making in mediating the impact of PGD risk factors. METHOD: A survey assessing PGD risk factors (low social support, insecure attachment, violent loss, neuroticism, and loss of a spouse), meaning, and rumination was administered 2-12 months postloss among adults across North America and Europe (mean age = 44.3, 71.9% female). At a 7-10 months follow-up, symptoms of PGD were assessed (n = 171). RESULTS: When measuring meaning with the Grief and Meaning Reconstruction Inventory, the moderated mediation pathway was significant for each PGD-risk factor. However, when measuring meaning with the Integration of Stressful Life Experiences-Short Form, the pathway was significant for every risk factors except violent loss. CONCLUSIONS: Rumination appears to moderate meaning-making in the development of PGD symptomatology. These findings highlight rumination as a target for intervention with at-risk grievers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".