This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]On: 05 December 2014, At: 04:08Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Death StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/udst20

The Role of Continuing Bonds in Coping With Grief:Overview and Future DirectionsBriana L. Root a & Julie Juola Exline aa Department of Psychological Sciences–Psychology Program , Case Western ReserveUniversity , Cleveland , Ohio , USAAccepted author version posted online: 14 May 2013.Published online: 01 Aug 2013.

To cite this article: Briana L. Root & Julie Juola Exline (2014) The Role of Continuing Bonds in Coping With Grief: Overviewand Future Directions, Death Studies, 38:1, 1-8, DOI: 10.1080/07481187.2012.712608

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2012.712608

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

The Role of Continuing Bonds in Coping With Grief:Overview and Future Directions

Briana L. Root and Julie Juola Exline

Department of Psychological Sciences–Psychology Program, Case Western ReserveUniversity, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

The existing empirical literature depicts a complex picture of the role that continuingbonds play in coping with bereavement, with contradictory findings emerging acrossstudies. This article presents an overview of continuing bonds research and highlightsseveral areas ripe for exploration. First, definitional issues are identified. Second, threepaths for clarification are presented: the bereaved’s perception of the bond as positiveor negative, the quality of the predeath relationship, and the bereaved’s afterlifebeliefs. Through refining the definition and exploring these potential avenues ofresearch, we hope to clarify the roles that continuing bonds may play in coping withbereavement.

OVERVIEW AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

What happens to a relationship after one member of thedyad dies? At a concrete level, death signifies the loss ofthe physical presence of the loved one. It is unclear,however, whether this physical absence must also signifythe loss of the relationship once shared. Although deathinevitably changes the relationship, perhaps the attach-ment may continue—albeit transformed—rather thanterminate upon death. Perhaps an interpersonal connec-tion could survive death, persisting without the physicalpresence of both members. Such a relationship has beenlabeled a ‘‘continuing bond’’ in the bereavement litera-ture. A recent shift in bereavement theory has suggestedthat continuing bonds are a natural and perhaps adapt-ive experience following a loss (Klass, Silverman, &Nickman, 1996). The purpose of this article is to presentan overview of the current state of continuing bondsresearch and to highlight several areas ripe for furtherexploration.

CONTINUING BONDS: DEFINITION ANDMANIFESTATIONS

A continuing bond has been defined as ‘‘the presence ofan ongoing inner relationship with the deceased personby the bereaved individual’’ (Stroebe & Schut, 2005,p. 477). Such a definition encompasses a wide varietyof behaviors, as reflected in the diversity of continuingbond expressions described in the bereavement litera-ture. For example, a continuing bond could focus onholding on to the memory of the deceased person, per-haps by reminiscing about the deceased (Marwit &Klass, 1996), telling stories about the deceased (Silver-man & Nickman, 1996a), looking at photographs ofthe deceased (Foster et al., 2011), or keeping possessionsthat once belonged to the deceased (Silverman & Nick-man, 1996a; Tyson-Rawson, 1996). Other examples ofcontinuing bonds include the bereaved individual’s per-ceptions of the deceased’s influence on his or her currentlife, including internalizing values and beliefs espousedby the deceased (Klass, 1993), taking on characteristicsof the deceased (Russac, Steighner, & Canto, 2002;Tyson-Rawson, 1996), doing things that the deceasedwould have liked (Foster et al., 2011), and viewing thedeceased as a role model to guide behavior (Marwit &Klass, 1996; Tyson-Rawson, 1996). Continuing bondexpressions may take the form of activities to honor thedeceased, such as altruistic acts or creating a memorial

Received 7 July 2011; accepted 1 July 2012.Address correspondence to Briana L. Root, Department of

Psychological Sciences–Psychology Program, Case Western Reserve

University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106-7123. E-mail:

briana.root@case.edu

Death Studies, 38: 1–8, 2014

Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 0748-1187 print=1091-7683 online

DOI: 10.1080/07481187.2012.712608

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

(Foster et al., 2011; Meert, Thurston & Briller, 2005).In other cases, the continuing bond might be experiencedan interactive connection with the deceased, as whenbereaved individuals perceive the presence of thedeceased (Glick, Weiss, & Parkes, 1974; Tyson-Rawson,1996), seek situation-specific guidance from the deceased(Marwit & Klass, 1996; Suhail, Jamil, Oyebode, &Ajmal, 2011), or try to engage in direct communicationwith the deceased (Foster et al., 2011; Normand,Nickman, & Silverman, 1996; Silverman & Nickman,1996a). For example, bereaved individuals may attemptto communicate with the deceased by talking, writing aletter, or praying (Foster et al., 2011). Another type ofa continuing bond would involve dreams or nightmaresabout the deceased (Silverman & Nickman, 1996a;Tyson-Rawson, 1996).

THE FUNCTION OF CONTINUING BONDS

Research findings indicate that many survivors maintainongoing connections with deceased loved ones and thatthe expression of such continuing bonds may be a rela-tively normal component of bereavement (Glick et al.,1974; Klass, 1993; Marwit & Klass, 1996; Shuchter &Zisook, 1988; Silverman & Nickman, 1996a). However,it remains to be seen whether such ties to the deceasedare adaptive, both in terms of grief resolution andpsychological well-being.

Historically, continuing bonds have been viewed asmaladaptive loss reactions and obstacles to successfulgrief resolution (Silverman & Klass, 1996). Past pre-dominant grief theories emphasized detachment fromthe deceased loved one or the severing of bonds as theprimary task of bereavement (Freud, 1961=1917;Worden, 1982). It was believed that the bereaved neededto withdraw the emotional and psychic energy previouslycommitted to the deceased to have it available for newrelationships and new life endeavors (Stroebe, Gergen,Gergen, & Stroebe, 1992). According to this logic, con-tinuing bonds could seem to threaten the survivor’swell-being by endangering the formation of new mean-ingful relationships in the present (Silverman & Klass,1996), potentially isolating the bereaved from sourcesof social support. Continuing bonds could also inhibitthe survivor from exploring alternative methods to fulfillneeds previously satisfied in the pre-death relationshipwith the deceased (Stroebe & Schut, 2005).

Recently, there has been a shift among bereavementtheorists away from the emphasis on detachment andtoward a willingness to include maintained connectionswith the deceased as a natural part of the bereavementprocess—and beyond that, a salutary factor in griefresolution (see Klass, Silverman, & Nickman, 1996).According to this model, during the grieving process

the bereaved remain involved and attached to theirlost loved one through the active construction of innerrepresentations of the deceased (Silverman & Klass,1996). The deceased’s influence in the bereaved’s life isnot viewed as static; instead, mourning represents anevolving process of adaptation and construction of atransformed connection (Rothaupt & Becker, 2007;Silverman & Klass, 1996). Maintaining a connection withthe deceased may be beneficial for the bereaved by pro-viding a source of solace for survivors (Klass, 1993).The continuation of the connection to the deceased mayprovide structure and comfort for the bereaved attempt-ing to cope with the changes the death has brought. Con-tinuing bonds therefore may act as grief-specific copingstrategies that provide the bereaved a link to his or herloved one that may help temper the pain associated withthe death (Asai et al., 2010; Conant, 1996).

Both perspectives suggest that continuing bondexpressions may be influential in the bereaved indivi-dual’s success in adaptation to loss—either by contribu-ting to or inhibiting the ability to cope with the loss. Ifkeeping a connection with the deceased represents a strat-egy to avoid confronting the loss, continuing bonds couldbe an obstacle to grief resolution, serving to maintain thebereaved individual’s distress. Alternatively, continuingbonds could function as coping methods that encouragegood adjustment following the loss of a loved one.

MIXED CONCLUSIONS FROM RECENTRESEARCH

A review of the empirical literature portrays a complexpicture of the role of continuing bonds in bereavement,with contradictory findings emerging across studies(Stroebe & Schut, 2005). Certain types of continuingbonds have been associated with both good and pooradjustment across different studies. For example, onestudy suggested that keeping the deceased’s possessionswas linked with concurrent but not later distress (Boelen,Stroebe, Schut, & Zijerveld, 2006), whereas anotherstudy revealed that keeping such possessions was linkedwith higher intensity grief over the long term (Field,Nichols, Holen, & Horowitz, 1999). One study indicatedthat those who used memories of the deceased as a sourceof comfort were seen as handling the loss well (Fieldet al., 1999), whereas other research linked such beha-viors with higher grief severity at 16–21 months post loss(Boelen et al., 2006).

Although qualitative studies indicate that continuingbonds are typically perceived as positive and helpfulfor the bereaved (Normand et al., 1996; Nowatzi &Grant Kalischuck, 2009), quantitative studies have indi-cated that the use of continuing bonds is linked withincreased distress at various time-points post-loss—both

2 B. L. ROOT AND J. J. EXLINE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

immediately following the death (Field & Friedrichs,2004) and up to 5 years later (Field, Gal-Oz, & Bonnano,2003). However, the attribution of causality for the dis-tress remains unclear (Stroebe & Schut, 2005). Theexperience of a continuing bond may bring forth stronggrief reactions; on the other hand, it could be that intensefeelings of grief lead to increased use of continuingbonds, elicited in efforts to self-soothe. Alternatively, apositive association between continuing bonds and grief-related symptoms might simply reflect a role of continu-ing bonds as an inherent part of the loss experience—orat least a typical symptom of bereavement.

NEXT STEPS FOR INVESTIGATION

Upon reviewing the existing literature, few conclusionscan be made regarding the adaptive quality of continuingbond use. We propose that to provide greater clarity tothis literature, some additional nuances about continuingbonds should be considered. In some areas, the scope ofcontinuing bonds research may need to be expanded. Inother areas, greater specificity and precision will be help-ful. Continuing bonds, as they are defined, encompass awide and varying array of behaviors and experiences. Itis important to clarify the dimensions on which thesebonds differ. In particular, to better understand the roleof continuing bonds in adjustment post-loss, it is crucialto assess the degree to which the bond manifestationacknowledges the reality of the death. In addition, someof the existing research has made several assumptionsabout the experience of continuing bonds that may haveprematurely narrowed the focus of study. By exploringsome of these assumptions, we hope to provide severalpossible paths to clarify the relationship between con-tinuing bonds and post-loss adaptation.

Definitional Issues Surrounding the ContinuingBond Concept

One possible source of confusion may be the very broadoperational definition of a continuing bond. Overall,continuing bond expressions seem to vary along severaldimensions. Each dimension has potential implicationsfor how the continuing bond manifestation may behelpful or harmful when coping with the loss.

Specificity

Continuing bond expressions range in terms oftheir specificity. Some manifestations described in theliterature are amorphous (e.g., sensing the presence ofthe deceased), whereas others are more defined (e.g.,seeing a vision or ghost of the deceased). Continuingbond expressions range from a vague, general sense of

connection to the deceased to a more concretemanifestation of the relationship. How tangible thebond feels to the bereaved individual may influencewhether the continued connection is helpful in adaptingto the loss. It is possible that bereaved individuals mayfeel closer and more connected to the deceased whenthe continuing bond takes a more specified form.

Proximity

Another dimension on which continuing bondexpression varies is the degree of proximity to thedeceased (Benore & Park, 2004). Some manifestationsseem to represent indirect or distal connections withthe deceased (e.g., using the deceased’s possessions aslinking objects or naming one’s children after thedeceased), whereas other behaviors indicate a moredirect link with the deceased (e.g., seeking guidance fromthe deceased about a current situation). Again, the prox-imity to the deceased implied by the continuing bondexpression may relate to the perceived strength of theconnection to the deceased or the degree of closenessthe bereaved feels toward the deceased. In addition, thedimension of proximity suggests the possibility of twodifferent foci of a continuing bond—a connection withthe memory of the deceased versus an ongoing connec-tion with the deceased, continuing to exist in some form.This distinction will be discussed in greater detail infollowing section.

Past Versus Present

Although some continuing bond expressions seem tofocus on the past relationship (e.g., reminiscing andstorytelling about shared experiences with the deceasedprior to the death), other manifestations suggest a per-ception that the relationship is current and evolving(e.g., direct communication or sensing the presence ofthe deceased; Tyson-Rawson, 1996). Not only might thisdistinction suggest differing degrees of perceived close-ness with the deceased, but it could also have importantimplications for the use of the continuing bond in copingwith the loss. For example, an ongoing, dynamicrelationship with the deceased suggests the possibilityfor the relationship to change over time, which mightinclude resolution of problems in the relationship.

Locus of Bond

Ongoing connections between the bereaved individualand the deceased differ in the locus of the continuingbond. Some continuing bond manifestations are intern-ally based (e.g., memories), emphasizing psychologicalproximity, whereas others are externalized (e.g., seeingvisions of the deceased), emphasizing physical proximity(Field & Filanosky, 2010). Some bereavement researchers

CONTINUING BONDS FUTURE DIRECTIONS 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

argue that externally based continuing bonds representattachment-based seeking behavior and suggest a refusalto accept the reality of the death (Field & Filanosky,2010). In addition, externally manifested continuingbonds may be more likely to be perceived as intrusiveor disturbing by the bereaved individual.

Initiating Agent

Finally, continuing bond expressions vary in whetherthe deceased and=or bereaved individual is cast in a pass-ive or active role (e.g., the bereaved seeking contact withthe deceased vs. continuing bond experiences believedto be deceased-initiated or controlled; Chan et al.,2005; Foster et al., 2011; Klugman, 2006; Silverman &Nickman, 1996b). This dimension has implications forthe adaptiveness of continuing bonds as well. Perhapsthe experience of deceased-initiated contact may be per-ceived as intrusive and frightening by the bereaved indi-vidual, whereas connections initiated purposely by thebereaved may foster a sense of control over the bond.Alternatively, the lack of a deceased-initiated connectionmay be seen as distressing for some individuals post-loss,if such contact was expected by the bereaved person.

Conclusions and Implications

The current definition of a continuing bond as aongoing, inner relationship allows for a diverse set ofpossible expressions that range in the degree of interac-tion between the bereaved and the deceased, the degreeof proximity to the deceased, the possibility of a directconnection to the deceased, the agency ascribed to thedeceased, and the degree to which the relationship isframed as being in the past versus continuing to evolvein the present and future. Because of the diversity inexpression, it may be difficult to identify clear implica-tions of empirical findings or to isolate characteristicsof the continuing bond experience that contribute to spe-cific grief outcomes. Therefore, an important next step inunderstanding continuing bonds’ role in coping with lossis to classify different continuing bond manifestations bythe dimensions listed above and to compare their associa-tions with adjustment outcomes. As suggested in theabove discussion, how the continuing bond is classifiedacross these dimensions likely influences whether the con-nection to the deceased is helpful or harmful in copingwith the loss. Certain manifestations may be perceivedas intrusive and distressing, for example, while othersmay enhance the sense of closeness to the deceased. Somemay allow for changes within the relationship betweenthe bereaved and deceased, whereas others may suggesta refusal to acknowledge the reality of the loss.

It seems likely that a critical factor in whether acontinuing bond is adaptive is the degree to which the

expression of the bond reflects the bereaved individual’srecognition and incorporation of the death into his orher ongoing life. It is important to distinguish betweencontinuing bond experiences that may reflect disbeliefand avoidance of the death and those that acknowledgethe reality of the death (Field & Filanosky, 2010).Perhaps difficulties in adjusting to the loss may indicatea need of ‘‘further transformation in the nature of thebond’’ to incorporate acceptance of the death (Stroebe& Schut, 2005, p. 490).

Possible Paths to Clarification

Next, we will identify several aspects of the continuingbond experience that have not been thoroughly studiedand represent potentially fruitful paths of exploration.Below, we identify and question several assumptionsapparent in the current conceptualizations of continuingbonds. Next, we suggest potential avenues for futureresearch.

The Bereaved’s Perceptions of the Continuing Bondas a Positive or Negative Experience

One factor that may influence the adaptiveness ofcontinuing bond expressions is how the bereavedperceives his or her experience of the continuing bond.Current measures seem to focus solely on one facet ofthe phenomenon: continuing bonds that represent an‘‘approach’’ orientation (Field et al., 1999). This orien-tation assumes that continuing bond experiences arewelcomed and desired by the bereaved. However, thegeneral definition of a continuing bond is an ongoingrelationship with an inner representation of the deceased(Stroebe & Schut, 2005). Given this definition, continu-ing bonds need not be restricted to positively perceivedexperiences.

The literature does cite examples in which a continuedconnection with the deceased has been perceived inupsetting or threatening ways. For some, sensing thepresence or perceived influence of the deceased may beexperienced as intrusive and frightening (Normandet al., 1996; Ronen et al., 2009; Tyson-Rawson, 1996).Continuing bonds may also be perceived as unwelcomeif they tend to elicit negative affect regarding the loss,the deceased person or the predeath relationship (Field& Freidrichs, 2004; Foster et al., 2011; Rubin, 1999).In addition, bereaved individuals’ experience of continu-ing bond expressions may also impact how they perceivethemselves. Perhaps thinking about the deceased contri-butes to a negative self-view (Rubin, 1999). For example,the bereaved may feel guilty when reminded of his or herinteractions with the deceased. If this were the case,having a continued connection with the deceased mayincrease the bereaved individual’s distress. In addition,

4 B. L. ROOT AND J. J. EXLINE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

some expressions of continuing bonds (e.g., sensing apresence) may cause bereaved individuals to questiontheir sanity (Klass, 1993; Tyson-Rawson, 1996) or to feelunsure of their ability to successfully cope with the loss.

The social and cultural views on acceptable mourningpractices likely play an important role in how bereavedindividuals perceive certain continuing bond experiences.Because bereavement is not a solely internal experience,it is important to examine continuing bonds’ interfacewith the ‘‘living community’’ (Silverman & Nickman,1996b, p. 349). Individuals who experience continuingbonds are parts of families, communities, societies, andcultures that may encourage or inhibit maintaining con-nections with the deceased. It is possible, therefore, thatexternal norms about mourning behavior may impactwhether continuing bonds are helpful or not to thebereaved in the mourning process (Lalande & Bonanno,2006). Continuing bond expressions may not be effectivein coping with bereavement if survivors do not feel thatthese expressions are socially and culturally acceptable.In particular, if people close to the bereaved do notexpress support or acceptance for their bereavementexperiences and beliefs, bereaved individuals may notwelcome the experience of a continued connection withthe deceased (Tyson-Rawson, 1996). If bereaved indivi-duals are concerned that their continued ties to thedeceased will be criticized or rejected by others, theymay feel limited in their experiences of the bond ormay find the bond distressing.

It is important to explore how continuing bondexperiences impact the survivor’s view of the deceasedand of themselves. For example, suddenly seeing orhearing the deceased individual might be frighteningfor the bereaved individual. Some continuing bondmanifestations, such as experiencing nightmares aboutthe deceased, may cause a bereaved person to view thedeceased as bothersome or even antagonistic. Finally,some continuing bond expressions may cause thebereaved individual to question their competency in cop-ing with the loss. For example, a widow might wonderwhether her difficulty in parting with her husband’spossessions represents a failure in terms of her abilityto cope or ‘‘move on.’’ To the extent that such percep-tions exacerbate a bereaved individual’s distress, theassociated continuing bonds may be maladaptive.

An important next step in continuing bonds research,therefore, is to assess the bereaved individual’s subjec-tive experience associated with the continued bondexpression, as well as the bereaved’s interpretation ofthe meaning of the expression—in particular, what theexpression signifies about the bereaved, about thedeceased, and about their relationship. Mixed-methodprocedures would be helpful to assess both the fre-quency and the subjective experience of continuing bondexpressions.

Predeath Relationship Quality

To some degree, existing continuing bonds theory andmeasurement have tended to incorporate the assumptionthat the pre-death relationship was satisfying and posi-tive. It is unclear, however, whether a positive predeathrelationship is a prerequisite for the existence of continu-ing bonds. Some research indicates that use of continu-ing bonds was more likely when predeath relationshipswere positive; in contrast, anger and blame expressedtoward the deceased postloss seemed to thwart the useof continuing bonds (Field et al., 2003). However, it isimportant to note that the aforementioned study wasfocused on positive continuing bond experiences;therefore it is unclear whether negative feelings towardthe deceased actually impede all types of continuedconnections.

Conflicted, ambivalent predeath relationships mayimpact whether continuing bonds are experienced andwhether such bonds are adaptive. Perhaps bereaved indi-viduals in such relationships would be less likely to seekan ongoing connection with the deceased. In one study,bereaved individuals’ endorsement of anger related topredeath relationship conflict predicted less belief thattheir deceased family member continued to exist in someform (Root, 2011). Conflict in the predeath relationshipmay result in reduced receptiveness to continuing tieswith the deceased, or it might lead to a sense of beingunable to control how the bond is manifested. Somerelevant findings come from a qualitative study ofwomen’s emotional relationships with their deceasedfathers (Tyson-Rawson, 1996): Although participantswho reported conflict in the predeath relationship diddescribe a continued connection with their fathers, itwas experienced as debilitating and intrusive.

In addition, if the relationship was problematic at thetime of the death, the bereaved may experience a senseof ‘‘unfinished business’’ following the loss (Tyson-Rawson, 1996, p. 139). The bereaved may feel limitedin resolving relationship problems now that theother person has died. The task of transforming therelationship following the death may thus be viewed asdifficult—and perhaps even overwhelming—forbereaved individuals who report ambivalent pre-deathrelationships. Not only must they transform therelationship to incorporate the reality of the death, butthey must also try to transform their negative feelingstoward the deceased into more positive or constructivefeelings. It is recognized, however, that for somebereaved individuals, the death and removal of thedeceased from ‘‘worldly concerns’’ may actually makeit easier for the bereaved to resolve negative feelingstoward the deceased (Hussein & Oyebode, 2009, p. 904).

It is important to examine the role of continuingbonds for bereaved individuals in conflicted relationships

CONTINUING BONDS FUTURE DIRECTIONS 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

with the deceased because certain continuing bondexpressions may actually provide opportunities for thebereaved to come to terms with pre-death relationshipconflict. For example, believing that one can communi-cate with the deceased may allow the bereaved individualto convey previously unshared messages with thedeceased regarding the conflict, which might take theform of confessions, explanations, or even confronta-tions. Bereaved individuals might also perceive themselvesas receiving forgiveness or apology-related communica-tions from the deceased. A sense of a continued, evolvingrelationship maymake it possible for bereaved individualsto forgive the deceased or of to forgive themselves fortransgressions against the deceased (e.g., Suhail et al.,2011; Woo & Chan, 2010). In short, not only may con-tinuing bonds be a coping strategy to ameliorate the painassociated with the loss and separation; they may alsoserve as a coping strategy for addressing unresolvedconflicts with the deceased.

In future work, longitudinal designs would help toclarify the role of pre-death relationship conflict in theuse of continuing bonds. Such studies could also deepenunderstanding of the evolution and timing of conflict-generated feelings from pre-loss to post-loss. In parti-cular, longitudinal research would allow examinationof the impact of the death of the transgressor on howthe surviving individual feels and thinks about a pre-death transgression. Understanding individuals’ effortsand degree of success at navigating the resolution ofinterpersonal transgressions after the offending personhas died—including the potential use of continuingbonds—will help to inform forgiveness interventionsfor bereaved populations.

Afterlife Beliefs

Some of the bereavement literature reflects anassumption (whether explicit or implicit) that deathmarks the end of existence. This view is evident in theemphasis on detachment in classic grief work theoriesmentioned previously (e.g., Freud, 1961=1917). How-ever, many people view death differently. For example,the majority of Americans (74%) believe in some formof life after death (Pew Forum on Religion & PublicLife, 2008). Inherent in some forms of continued bondmanifestations is the belief that some form of existenceis possible following death. For example, the continuingbond expressions of communicating with the deceased,sensing the presence of the deceased, and seeking guid-ance from the deceased all suggest that the bereaved per-ceives the deceased as continuing to exist in some form.However, bereaved individuals’ death-specific religiousand cultural beliefs (including beliefs in an afterlife) areremarkably absent from the current literature (Benore& Park, 2004).

As argued above, distinguishing between bonds thatacknowledge versus deny the reality of the death seemslike a critical distinction in whether a continued bondwith the deceased will be adaptive for the bereaved. Fieldand Filanosky (2010) examined this distinction by com-paring what they termed internalized and externalizedcontinuing bonds. Internalized bonds were those connec-tions with the deceased that fostered psychological prox-imity by using the deceased as an internalized securebase. Externalized bonds were those that suggestedphysical proximity, bonds that confused whether thedeceased were still alive or dead (e.g., seeing or hearingthe deceased). Externalized bonds were viewed as indica-tions of a failure to integrate and acknowledge the realityof the death. However, not all ‘‘external’’ connectionswith the deceased necessarily represent a denial of thedeath. For individuals who believe in life after death, itseems possible that they may view their loved one notas ‘‘alive’’ (in the physical, earthly sense) but yet still con-tinuing to exist in some form. Continuing bond expres-sions that may otherwise suggest unresolved loss maynot necessarily indicate unresolved loss for individualswhose worldviews include beliefs in life after or deathor in the possibility of mutual ongoing influence betweenthe bereaved and deceased. Again, the recognition of thereality of the death seems crucial—even though bereavedindividuals who believe in the afterlife may perceive thedeceased as continuing to exist as an external presence,there is an implicit recognition that the relationship, asit existed in this world, has terminated. Given the numberof people who believe in an afterlife, it seems vital toexplore the role of death-specific religious beliefs in themanifestation of continuing bonds, and in particular thisdistinction between internalized and externalized bonds.

Furthermore, assessment of the bereaved individual’sbelief in life after death would seem to be a crucialcomponent in assessing the function of continuing bonds(Benore & Park, 2004; Park & Benore, 2004). Individualswho believe in an afterlife may have different forms ofcontinuing bonds available for their use—in particular,bonds that represent an interactive and dynamicrelationship with the deceased. In addition, belief in anafterlife may reduce the need for the bereaved to rec-oncile the ‘‘irrevocability’’ of their loved one’s death, asthere remains the possibility of a future reunion. Ofcourse, the bereaved individual that believes in life afterdeath still needs to navigate the necessary transforma-tions that death brings to the relationship, includingmourning the end of the relationship as it was onceknown. Yet belief in an afterlife may assure the bereavedthat separation from their loved one, albeit painful, is notpermanent (Benore & Park, 2004; Suhail et al., 2011).

It has been suggested that the bereaved person’s successin incorporating the death into their global meaning sys-tem is more instrumental in reducing grief symptoms than

6 B. L. ROOT AND J. J. EXLINE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

the use of continuing bonds (Neimeyer, Baldwin, &Gillies, 2006). Perhaps, however, certain continuing bondexperiences may assist in the bereaved individual’s abilityto find meaning post-loss. Continuing bonds may play arole in coping through their influence on the bereavedindividual’s appraisal of the loss (Benore & Park, 2004).Continued bonds with the deceased may help a bereavedperson to incorporate the loss within a global meaningstructure centering on death-specific religious beliefs.Engaging in continued bonds with the deceased may helpthe bereaved make sense of the loss and assimilate thedeath into their ongoing lives (Chapple, Swift, &Ziebland, 2011; Marrone, 1999). Similarly, Nowatzi andGrant Kalischuck (2009) reported that continuing bondexpressions assured bereaved individuals of an afterlife,which comforted them and aided them in adapting to theloss. Golsworthy and Coyle (1999) noted, however, thatdespite feeling a continued connection with the deceasedthrough spiritual beliefs, bereaved individuals still experi-enced a great sense of loss at the death of a loved one.

Beliefs in an afterlife may be a source of comfort for thebereaved if they believe that their loved one is ‘‘in a betterplace’’ and without suffering. It is also important to note,however, that not all conceptualizations of an afterlife arepositive (Chan et al., 2005; Exline &Yali, 2007). The pros-pect that their deceased loved one is being punished inHellmaymake continuing bonds with the deceased frighteningand painful for the survivor (Exline, 2003). Similarly, thebelief that the deceased person is being punished in purga-tory or having a negative reincarnation experience couldbe distressing for the bereaved individual and impacthis or her continuing bond with the deceased. As sug-gested by Silverman et al. (1992), the ability to locatethe deceased is an important factor in continuing bonds.Understanding the bereaved person’s beliefs regardinglife after death, and therefore the potential ‘‘locations’’of the deceased—and that location’s implications—is animportant ingredient in understanding the adaptivenessof continuing bonds in coping with loss.

In future research, it will be important to clarify thebereaved’s beliefs in an afterlife when assessing whetheror not continuing bonds represent unresolved loss. Itwould also be interesting to compare whether bereavedindividuals who believe in a continued existence followingdeath utilize unique continuing bond expressions com-pared to those who do not believe in an afterlife. Again,mixed methods procedures could help to elaborate theexistence of such beliefs and the implications they haveon the forms and uses of continuing bond expressions.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining a continued connection with a deceasedloved one may play an important role in coping with

the loss. However, whether this role is salutary or detri-mental to grief resolution remains unclear. Potentially,continuing bonds expressions could aid in post-lossadjustment. Beyond the potential provision of continuityand solace, the possibility of a continued, evolvingrelationship may form a gateway for the bereaved toresolve ‘‘unfinished business’’ with the deceased.Another possibility, however, is that continuing bondsmay represent a denial of the loss, thereby obstructingsuccessful grief resolution.

Upon reviewing the existing literature, few firm con-clusions can be made regarding the adaptive quality ofcontinuing bond use. In some respects, the focus ofinquiry represented in existing literature may be toobroad. The current operational definition of a continuingbond encompasses a wide array of expressions, rangingacross many dimensions. However, one might also arguethat existing research has been too narrow in its focus,making certain assumptions about continuing bondexpressions (as noted above) that may obscure therelationship between continuing bonds and grief resol-ution. Through refining the definition and clarifyingthe dimensions of continuing bond expressions, as wellas exploring the potential areas for further researchidentified above, we are hopeful that a clearer picture willemerge regarding the roles that continuing bonds play incoping with the loss of a loved one.

REFERENCES

Asai, M., Fujimon, M., Akizuki, N., Inagaki, M., Matsui, Y., &

Uchitomi, Y. (2010). Psychological states andcoping strategies after

bereavement among the spouses of cancer patients: A qualitative

study. Psycho-Oncology, 19, 38–45.

Boelen, P. A., Stroebe, M. S., Schut, H. A. W., & Zijerveld, A. M.

(2006). Continuing bonds and grief: A prospective analysis. Death

Studies, 30, 767–776.

Benore, E. R., & Park, C. L. (2004). Death-specific religious beliefs and

bereavement: Belief in an afterlife and continued attachment. The

International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 14, 1–22.

Chan, C. L. W., Chow, A. Y. M., Ho, S. M. Y., Tsui, Y. K. Y., Tin, A.

F., Koo, B. W. K., & Koo, E. W. K. (2005). The experience of

Chinese bereaved persons: A preliminary study of meaning making

and continuing bonds. Death Studies, 29, 923–947.

Chapple, A., Swift, C., & Ziebland, S. (2011). The role of spirituality

and religion for those bereaved due to a traumatic death. Mortality,

16(1), 1–19.

Conant, R. D. (1996). Memories of the death and life of a spouse: The

role of images and sense of presence in grief. In D. Klass, P. R.

Silverman, & S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing bonds: New under-

standings of grief (pp. 179–196). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Exline, J. J. (2003). Belief in Heaven and Hell among Christians in the

United States: Denominational differences and clinical implications.

Omega: Journal of Death and Dying, 47, 155–168.

Exline, J. J., & Yali, A. M. (2007). Heaven’s gates and Hell’s flames:

Afterlife beliefs of Catholic and Protestant undergraduates.

Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 17, 235–260.

Field, N. P. (2006). Unresolved grief and continuing bonds: An

attachment perspective. Death Studies, 30, 739–756.

CONTINUING BONDS FUTURE DIRECTIONS 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

Field, N. P., & Filanosky, C. (2010). Continuing bonds, risk factors for

complicated grief, and adjustment to bereavement. Death Studies,

34(1), 1–29.

Field, N. P., & Friedrichs, M. (2004). Continuing bonds in coping with

the death of a husband. Death Studies, 28, 597–620.

Field, N. P., Gal-Oz, E., & Bonanno, G. A. (2003). Continuing bonds

and adjustment at 5 years after the death of a spouse. Journal of

Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 110–117.

Field, N. P., Gao, B., & Paderna, L. (2005). Continuing bonds in

bereavement: An attachment theory based perspective. Death

Studies, 29, 277–299.

Field, N. P., Nichols, C., Holen, A., & Horowitz, M. J. (1999). The

relation of continuing attachment to adjustment in conjugal bereave-

ment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 212–218.

Foster, T., Gilmer, M., Davies, B., Dietrich, M., Barrera, M.,

Fairclough, D., Vannatta, K., & Gerhardt, C. (2011). Comparison

of continuing bonds reported by parents and siblings after a child’s

death from cancer. Death Studies, 35, 420–440.

Freud, S. (1961). Mourning and melancholia. In J. Strachey (Ed. and

Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of

Sigmund Freud (Vol. 14, pp. 243–258). London, UK: Hogarth Press.

(Original work published 1917.)

Golsworthy, R., & Coyle, A. (1999). Spiritual beliefs and the search

for meaning among older adults following partner loss. Mortality,

4, 21–40.

Glick, I. O., Weiss, R. S., & Parkes, C. M. (1974). The first year of

bereavement. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Hussein, H., & Oyebode, J. R. (2009). Influences of religion and

culture on continuing bonds in a sample of British Muslims of

Pakistani origin. Death Studies, 33, 900–912.

Klass, D. (1993). Solace and immortality: Bereaved parents’ continu-

ing bond with their children. Death Studies, 17, 343–368.

Klass, D., Silverman, P. R., & Nickman, S. L. (1996). Continuing

bonds: New understandings of grief. Washington, DC: Taylor &

Francis.

Klugman, C. (2006). Dead men talking: Evidence of post death

contact and continuing bonds. Omega: Journal of Death and Dying,

53, 249–262.

Lalande, K. M., & Bonanno, G. A. (2006). Culture and continuing

bonds: A prospective comparison of bereavement in theUnited States

and the People’s Republic of China. Death Studies, 30, 303–324.

Marrone, R. (1999). Dying, mourning, and spirituality: A psychologi-

cal perspective. Death Studies, 23, 495–519.

Marwit, S. J., & Klass, D. (1996). Grief and the role of inner represen-

tation of the deceased. In D. Klass, P. R. Silverman, & S. L. Nickman

(Eds.), Continuing bonds: New understandings of grief (pp. 297–308).

Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Meert, K. L., Thurston, C. S., & Briller, S. H. (2005). The spiritual

needs of parents at the time of their child’s death in the pediatric

intensive care unit and during bereavement: A qualitative study.

Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, 6, 420–427.

Neimeyer, R. A., Baldwin, S. A., & Gillies, J. (2006). Continuing

bonds and reconstructing meaning: Mitigating complications in

bereavement. Death Studies, 30, 715–738.

Normand, C. L., Nickman, S. L., & Silverman, P. R. (1996). Bereaved

children’s changing relationships with the deceased. In D. Klass, P. R.

Silverman, & S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing bonds: New under-

standings of grief (pp. 87–111). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Nowatzi, N. R., & Grant Kalischuk, R. (2009). Post-death encounters:

Grieving, mourning, and healing. Omega: Journal of Death and

Dying, 59(2), 91–111.

Park, C. L., & Benore, E. R. (2004). ‘‘You’re still there’’: Beliefs in

continued relationships with the deceased as unique religious beliefs

that may influence coping adjustment. The International Journal for

the Psychology of Religion, 14, 37–46.

Pew Forum on Religion, & Public Life. (2008). U.S. religious landscape

survey. (Report 2). Retrieved from http://religions.pewforum.org/

reports

Ronen, R., Packman, W., Field, N. P., Davies, B., Kramer, R., &

Long, J. K. (2009). The relationship between grief adjustment and

continuing bonds for parents who have lost a child. Omega: Journal

of Death and Dying, 60(1), 1–31.

Root, B. L. (2011).Bereaved individuals’ feelings of anger toward deceased

family members: A mixed methods approach. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH.

Rothaupt, J. W., & Becker, K. (2007). A literature review of Western

bereavement theory: From decathecting to continuing bonds. The

Family Journal, 15(6), 6–15.

Rubin, S. S. (1999). The two-track model of bereavement: Overview,

retrospect, and prospect. Death Studies, 23, 681–714.

Russac, R. J., Steighner, N. S., & Canto, A. I. (2002). Grief work

versus continuing bonds: A call for paradigm integration or replace-

ment? Death Studies, 26, 463–478.

Shuchter, S. R., & Zisook, S. (1988). Widowhood: The continuing

relationship with the dead spouse. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic,

52, 269–279.

Silverman, P. R., & Klass, D. (1996). Introduction: What’s the

problem?. In D. Klass, P. R. Silverman, & S. L. Nickman (Eds.),

Continuing bonds: New understandings of grief (pp. 3–27). Washing-

ton, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Silverman, P. R., & Nickman, S. L. (1996a). Children’s construction of

their dead parents. In D. Klass, P. R. Silverman, & S. L. Nickman

(Eds.), Continuing bonds: New understandings of grief (pp. 73–86).

Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Silverman, P. R., & Nickman, S. L. (1996b). Concluding thoughts. In

D. Klass, P. R. Silverman, & S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing

bonds: New understandings of grief (pp. 349–355). Washington,

DC: Taylor & Francis.

Stroebe, M., Gergen, M. M., Gergen, K. J., & Stroebe, W. (1992).

Broken hearts or broken bonds: Love and death in historical

perspective. American Psychologist, 47, 1205–1212.

Stroebe, M., & Schut, H. (2005). To continue or relinquish bonds:

A review of consequences for the bereaved. Death Studies, 29,

477–494.

Suhail, K., Jamil, N., Oyebode, J., & Ajmal, M. A. (2011). Continuing

bonds in bereaved Pakistani Muslims: Effects of culture and religi-

on. Death Studies, 35, 22–41.

Tyson-Rawson, K. (1996). Relationship and heritage: Manifestations

of ongoing attachment following father death. In D. Klass, P. R.

Silverman, & S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing bonds: New under-

standings of grief (pp. 125–145). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

Woo, I. M. H., & Chan, C. L. W. (2010). Management of survival

guilt by a Chinese widower through the use of continuing bonds.

Mortality, 15(1), 38–46.

Worden, J. W. (1982). Grief counseling and grief therapy: A handbook

for the mental health practitioner. New York, NY: Springer.

8 B. L. ROOT AND J. J. EXLINE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

08 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014