Existential isolation and prolonged grief in bereaved people: The moderating role of culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Existential isolation refers to an individual's awareness of the unbridgeable gulf between oneself, other people and the world. This kind of isolation has been found to be higher in individuals with nonnormative experiences, such as racial or sexual minorities. Bereaved individuals may experience a stronger sense of existential isolation and feel that no one shares their feelings or perceptions. However, research on bereaved people's experiences of existential isolation and its effects on post-loss adaptation is scarce. This study aims to validate the German and Chinese versions of the Existential Isolation Scale, investigate cultural and gender differences in existential isolation and explore the associations between existential isolation and prolonged grief symptoms in German-speaking and Chinese bereaved individuals. METHODS: A cross-sectional study with 267 Chinese and 158 German-speaking bereaved participants was conducted. The participants completed self-report questionnaires assessing existential isolation, prolonged grief symptoms, social networks, loneliness and social acknowledgement. RESULTS: The results indicated that the German and Chinese versions of the Existential Isolation Scale demonstrated adequate validity and reliability. No cultural or gender differences (or their interaction) were found for existential isolation. Higher existential isolation was associated with elevated prolonged grief symptoms, which was further moderated by the cultural group. The relationship between existential isolation and prolonged grief symptoms was significant for the German-speaking bereaved people but not significant for those from China. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the role of existential isolation in the adaptation to bereavement and how different cultural backgrounds moderate the effect of existential isolation on post-loss reactions. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".