Content Analysis of Expressive Writing Narratives About Stressful Relational Events Using Interpersonal Decentering

Abstract

This study used secondary analysis of data from two studies of expressive writing about stressful relational events to first describe the relations of word use to social-cognitive maturity of role-taking using Feffer’s Interpersonal Decentering scoring system and then to test hypotheses about active processing of relational information versus event closure. This scoring system for imaginative Thematic Apperception Test stories was adapted for expressive writing protocols and related to proportions of cognitive and emotional words used, relationship characteristics, and the subjective experience of writing. Relational events included relationship breakups (including divorce), loved one’s illness or death, and abuse. Decentering maturity was positively correlated with cognitive and insight words and with positive emotion words in both studies’ narratives, and also with self-rated experiences of emotional intensity in the low closure group only. Gender differences were consistent with gender theories applied to relational stressors.

Keywords

expressive writing content analysis interpersonal decentering narratives emotions social cognition relational stressors relationship breakups

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baumeister

R. F.

Newman

L. S.

(1994). How stories make sense of personal experiences: Motives that shape autobiographical narratives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 676-690.

Boals

Banks

J. B.

Hathaway

L. M.

Schuettler

(2011). Use of cognitive words in stressful narratives reflects the meaning-making process. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30, 378-403.

Boals

Klein

(2005). Word use in emotional narratives about failed romantic relationships and subsequent mental health. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 24, 252-268.

Boals

Perez

A. S.

(2009). Language use predicts phenomenological properties of Holocaust memories and health. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1318-1332.

Bornstein

R. F.

(2010). Gender schemas, gender roles, and expressive writing: Toward a process-focused model. Sex Roles, 63, 173-177.

Cohen

(1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.

Dobbs

Leeper

Jenkins

S. R.

(2004). Feffer’s Interpersonal Decentering TAT scoring system and close relationships. Paper presented at the 112th annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, HI.

Elfers

Martin

Sokol

(2008). Perspective taking: A review of research and theory extending Selman’s developmental model of perspective taking. In Columbus

A. M.

(Ed.), Advances in psychology research (pp. 229-262). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.

Enright

Lapsley

(1980). Social role-taking: A review of the constructs, measures, and measurement properties. Review of Educational Research, 50, 647-674.

10.

Feffer

M. H.

(1959). The cognitive implications of role-taking behavior. Journal of Personality, 27, 152-158.

11.

Feffer

M. H.

(1966). Initial story (TAT) scoring categories. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

12.

Feffer

(1967). Symptom expression as a form of primitive decentering. Psychological Review, 74, 16-28.

13.

Feffer

Jahelka

(1968). Implications of the decentering concept for the structuring of projective content. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32, 434-441.

14.

Feffer

Leeper

Dobbs

Jenkins

S. R.

Perez

L. E.

(2008). Scoring manual for Feffer’s Interpersonal Decentering. In Jenkins

S. R.

(Ed.), Handbook of clinical scoring systems for thematic apperceptive techniques (pp. 157-180). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

15.

Frattaroli

(2006). Experimental disclosure and its moderators: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 823-865.

16.

Frisina

P. G.

Borod

J. C.

Lepore

S. J.

(2004). A meta-analysis of the effects of written emotional disclosure on the health outcomes of clinical populations. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 192, 629-634.

17.

Genero

Miller

Surrey

Baldwin

(1992). Measuring perceived mutuality in close relationships: Validation of the Mutual Psychological Development Questionnaire. Journal of Family Psychology, 6, 36-48.

18.

Jenkins

S. R.

(2008). Introduction: Why “score” TATs, anyway? In Jenkins

S. R.

(Ed.), Handbook of clinical scoring systems for thematic apperceptive techniques (pp. 3-38). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

19.

Klein

Boals

(2001). EW can increase working memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 520-533.

20.

Klein

Boals

(2010). Coherence, cohesiveness and narrative structure in personal accounts of stressful experiences. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 29, 258-282.

21.

Leeper

Dobbs

Jenkins

S. R.

(2008). Melvin Feffer’s interpersonal decentering. In Jenkins

S. R.

(Ed.), Handbook of clinical scoring systems for thematic apperceptive techniques (pp. 149-156). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

22.

Liang

Tracy

Taylor

Williams

Jordan

Miller

J. B.

(2002). The relational health indices: A study of women’s relationships. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 25-35.

23.

Lowenherz

Feffer

M. H.

(1969). Cognitive level as a function of defensive isolation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 74, 352-357.

24.

McAdams

(1993). The stories we live by: Personal myths and the making of the self. New York, NY: William Morrow.

25.

Pennebaker

J. W.

Booth

R. J.

Francis

M. E.

(2007). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC 2007. Austin, TX: LIWC.

26.

Pennebaker

J. W.

Mayne

Francis

M. E.

(1997). Linguistic predictors of adaptive bereavement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 863-871.

27.

Piaget

(1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15, 1-12.

28.

Ramirez-Esparza

Pennebaker

J. W.

(2006). Do good stories produce good health? Exploring words, language, and culture. Narrative Inquiry, 16, 211-219.

29.

Range

Jenkins

S. R.

(2010). Who benefits from Pennebaker’s EW paradigm? Research recommendations from three gender theories. Sex Roles, 63, 149-164.

30.

Slatcher

R. B.

Pennebaker

J. W.

(2006). How do I love thee? Let me count the words: The social effects of expressive writing. Psychological Science, 17, 660-664.

31.

Sloan

D. M.

Marx

B. P.

(2004). Taking pen to hand: Evaluating theories underlying the written disclosure paradigm. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 121-137.

32.

Smith

C. P.

Atkinson

J. W.

McClelland

D. C.

Veroff

(Eds.). (1992). Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

33.

Smith

C. P.

Feld

S. C.

Franz

C. E.

(1992). Methodological considerations: Steps in research employing content analysis systems. In Smith

C. P.

Atkinson

J. W.

McClelland

D. C.

Veroff

(Eds.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis (pp. 515-536). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

34.

Smyth

J. M.

(1998). Written emotional expression: Effect sizes, outcome types, and moderating variables. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 174-184.

35.

Smyth

J. M.

Pennebaker

J. W.

(2008). Exploring the boundary conditions of EW: In search of the right recipe. British Journal of Health Psychology, 13, 1-7.

36.

Stickney

L. T.

(2010). Who benefits from Pennebaker’s expressive writing? More research recommendations: A commentary on Range and Jenkins. Sex Roles, 63, 165-172.

37.

Strober

(1979). The structuring of interpersonal relations in schizophrenic adolescents: A decentering analysis of Thematic Apperception Test stories. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 7, 309-316.