difficulties’’ (p. 460). Tedeschi and Calhoun found that the trauma sample
experienced greater growth than the non-trauma sample at a 99.9%
significance level. In addition, the trauma sample experienced greater growth
in every category except Spiritual Change (which I will discuss in a later
section). In a subsequent work, Tedeschi et al. (2007) concluded that growth
only followed an event that confronted a person’s core beliefs.
Janoff-Bulman (2004), responding to the work of Tedeschi and Calhoun
(1996), hypothesized that posttraumatic growth is a result of three factors. The
first, strength through suffering, refers to trauma survivors discovering new
strengths and developing new coping skills and resources. The second,
psychological preparedness, deals with trauma survivors being better prepared
for subsequent events, and being less traumatized by them. The final one,
existential reevaluation, concerns the survivor’s renewed appreciation for life in
the aftermath of catastrophe. These proposed mechanisms for posttraumatic
growth are plausible, but they require further investigation.
Reflection Rather than Rumination
As I will discuss in a later section, meaning-making is an important part of
posttraumatic growth. However, searching for meaning and finding meaning
are two different things. Boyraz, Horne, and Sayger (2010) used three
assessments with 380 bereaved individuals to test the hypothesis that reflection
may be an important part of meaning-making. The first assessment, the
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule of Watson, Clark, and Tellegen (1988)
contains 20 feelings such as ‘‘upset’’ or ‘‘strong,’’ which respondents rank
according to their experienced over various time intervals from ‘‘this moment’’
to ‘‘over the past year’’ to ‘‘in general’’ (p. 1070). The second assessment, the
Rumination-Reflection Questionnaire of Trapnell and Campbell (1999)
includes 12 ranking questions on rumination such as ‘‘I often find myself
reevaluating something I have done,’’ and 12 on reflection such as ‘‘I love to
meditate on the nature and meaning of things’’(p. 293). The final assessment,
an adaptation of the Positive Meaning Scale of Tugade and Fredrickson
(2004), consists of four questions:
N
‘‘Did anything good come out of dealing with this loss?’’
N
‘‘Do you think you might find benefit from this situation in the long
term?’’
N
‘‘Do you think it is likely that there is something to learn from this
experience?’’
N
‘‘Do you think it is likely that this experience could change your life in a
positive way?’’ (Boyraz et al., 2010).
The authors found a positive correlation between positive affect and reflection,
a positive correlation between reflection and positive meaning-finding, and a
negative correlation between negative affect and reflection. They concluded
that positive affect promotes reflection (and vice versa), and that reflection
promotes positive meaning-finding. They cautioned that ‘‘a search for meaning
78
The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 2014, Vol. 46, No. 1
that is accompanied by negative affect may prevent bereaved individuals from
receiving positive benefits from their loss’’ (p. 246). To deal with the fact that
bereaved individuals often suffer from negative affect, the authors suggested
using therapy as a tool to aid in reflection following a loss.
While reflection is beneficial in thinking about an event, rumination is its
opposite, as Williams, Teasdale, Segal, and Kabat-Zinn (2007) explained.
‘‘When we ruminate,’’ they wrote, ‘‘we become fruitlessly preoccupied with the
fact that we are unhappy and with the causes, meanings, and consequences of
our unhappiness’’ (p. 43). Reflection is a creative process that often involves
the critical examination of thoughts. As a client explained to me, reflection can
defeat the toxic effects of rumination:
It used to be that a negative thought would get hold of me and go round and
round in my head, and I would spiral down into suicidal depression. Now
when I get a negative thought, I write it down in my journal. I look at it and
reflect on it, and I realize how wrong it is.
Rumination involves preoccupation with the nadir event, a loss orientation. Its
antidote, reflection, involves a focus on life after the nadir event, a restoration
orientation. Such reflection leads to a discovery of meaning, which may be as
simple as learning to enjoy life again (Kumar, 2005). As Joseph et al. (1993)
discovered, the discovery of at least some meaning in their lives seems to be a
characteristic of disaster survivors. In a later section, I discuss therapeutic tools
to encourage reflection and meaning-making.
R
EINCORPORATION
: W
ELL
-B
EING
, M
EANING
, S
PIRITUALITY
,
W
ISDOM
,
AND
C
OMPASSION
Many survivors of the Herald of Free Enterprise and Jupiter disasters made
positive changes in their lives following these nadir experiences. They were able
to focus on life after the event (a restoration orientation) rather than the event
itself (a loss orientation). They somehow reincorporated themselves into lives
forever changed by their brush with death. Such changes did not take place
immediately of course, but disaster survivors who do not suffer psychological
trauma may actually be experiencing psychological growth (Joseph et al.,
1993). The immediate aftermath of a disaster may well be a desert or a sterile
void, but as Perls (1959/1969) pointed out, sometimes the sterile void turns into
a fertile void and ‘‘the desert starts to bloom’’ (p. 61). What characterizes this
changed landscape of the reincorporation stage?
Personal Well-Being
Tedeschi and Calhoun (1996) found that those suffering severe trauma
experienced an increase in personal well-being, especially in the areas of
appreciation of life and personal strength. They found positive change in the
areas of new possibilities and relating to others. They also found positive
Nadir Experience
79