The death of a loved one has been linked to a variety of emotional and cognitive outcomes. Individuals who have lost a close friend may feel protracted grief. Understanding the processes involved in coping with sorrow is critical for identifying persons needing assistance and developing solutions. Life story chapters are critical moments in life stories that promote a cohesive view of life and a feeling of who one is as a person. The authors and articles I will be analyzing are two studies called  “Narrative Identity and Grief Reactions: A Prospective Study of Bereaved Partners” By  Dorthe Kirkegaard Thomsen, Marie Lundorff, and Maja O’Connor Aarhus University, Denmark, Anette Damkier Odense University Clinic, Denmark. And “It’s not who you lose, it’s who you are: Identity and symptom trajectory in prolonged grief” By Celia B. Harris, Ruth Brookman, and Maja O’Connor. To articulate the notion of how loss and grief contribute to identity development, the authors use logos, cause and effect, and rhetorical questioning.

A major emphasis of both studies is developing logical arguments supported by factual information and statistical analysis. The authors meticulously examine the connection between grief responses and narrative identity, providing a logical framework for understanding the underlying mechanisms. Both sources base their claims and conclusions on data and statistics. Empirical data from both studies provides a solid foundation for the authors’ studies and allows them to substantiate their assertions. Data supports the writers’ main points and lends the writings a greater sense of scientific rigor. For instance“ Consistent with the predictions of the Cognitive, we found that overlapping identity played a key role in prolonged grief symptoms. Interestingly we also found that this role was time-specific; it was an overlap-ping post-bereavement identity, rather than pre-bereavement identity, that predicted the maintenance of grief symptoms over and above initial symptoms in our regression analysis. This finding has theoretical implications regarding our understanding of the trajectory of prolonged grief and associated risk factors.”(Dorthe, Marie, Maja  2)These results have implications for our understanding of prolonged grief and the factors that contribute to its continuation. By recognizing the significance of post-loss identities, researchers can gain insights into how people cope with and maintain grief over time. Another example “One study showed that participants with complicated grief were less likely to describe self-defining memories of the loss with redemption (a move from negative to positive content) and included more negative affect compared to bereaved participants without complicated grief .”(Celia, Ruth,Maja 4) According to the study, when people described their self-defining recollections of the loss, they were less likely to include redemption, a change from negative to positive content. Additionally, they showed greater negative feelings than bereaved people who did not experience complex bereavement. This implies that how people explain their losses by focusing on the good things that happened or by looking for forgiveness may affect how they deal with grief. Knowing these story processes can help one better understand how people with and without complex sorrow use different coping strategies. To support the study’s logical arguments, research findings, and statistical data are thoughtfully included throughout. Thomsen, Lundorff, and O’Connor build a strong argument for the interaction between grieving reactions and narrative identity through a logical approach, which encourages readers to interact critically with the research findings.

Rebuilding self-narratives was essential to the grieving process, as the research showed a strong cause-and-effect relationship between changes in narrative identity and the degree of grief emotions. The objective of both sources is to examine and contrast the results of these two investigations to clarify the causal relationship between narrative identity and grieving processes.  They both explore the relationship between narrative identity and prolonged grief, focusing on how individuals’ sense of self influenced their grief symptoms over time. The study in “It’s not who you lose, it’s who you are: Identity and symptom trajectory in prolonged grief” revealed that “individuals who experienced a prolonged grief reaction tended to have a more complex and conflicted sense of self, characterized by an inability to integrate the loss into their identity. This inability to integrate the loss led to persistent and intense grief symptoms, indicating a direct correlation between narrative identity and the trajectory of grief reactions.” Another example in  “Narrative Identity and Grief Reactions: A Prospective Study of Bereaved Partners” states “The study found that participants who engaged in narrative processing of their grief experiences showed a significant decrease in depressive symptoms over time, indicating a causal relationship between narrative identity construction and emotional well-being.” This underscores the crucial role that narrative coherence plays in the grieving process by highlighting the causal association between unresolved narrative identity concerns and the continuation of grief symptoms. These studies’ use of cause-and-effect links is essential for expanding our knowledge of grieving responses, directing interventions, forecasting results, and improving support for those navigating the challenges of loss.

The writers invite readers to engage in critical thinking by using rhetorical questions. It allows the reader a moment to pause and think about the question. For that reason, they are effective in hooking a reader’s interest and making them think about their own response to the question at hand. For example, Harris, Brookman, and O’Connor pose the question, “What does the deceased person mean for the bereaved person’s sense of self?” This rhetorical question prompts readers to contemplate the impact of the deceased individual on the bereaved person’s identity, encouraging a deeper exploration of the complex interconnections between identity and grief. Moreover, rhetorical questions in these articles stimulate introspection and self-inquiry, fostering a more nuanced understanding of the multifaceted nature of grief reactions. Thomsen, Lundorff, O’Connor, Harris, and Brookman employ rhetorical questions to provoke readers to consider the varied ways in which individuals’ responses to grief are shaped by their unique narrative identities. Furthermore, the articles by Thomsen, Lundorff, and O’Connor, as well as Harris, Brookman, and O’Connor, underscore the influence of narrative identity on the trajectory of prolonged grief symptoms. Using rhetorical questions, the authors encourage readers to critically assess how individuals’ self-concept and understanding of their own life stories contribute to the persistence and intensity of grief symptoms over time. Harris, Brookman, and O’Connor pose the rhetorical question, “How does the deceased person fit into the bereaved person’s ongoing sense of self?” By framing the discussion in this way, the authors prompt readers to reflect on the enduring impact of the deceased individual on the bereaved person’s identity, shedding light on the intricate interplay between identity and symptom trajectory in prolonged grief.

To conclude, the research conducted by Thomsen, Lundorff, and O’Connor as well as Harris, Brookman, and O’Connor provides a significant understanding of the causal relationship between narrative identity and grieving processes. Thanks to the author’s use of data and statistics, logic, and cause and effect, we can grasp. The necessity for therapies that assist people in rebuilding their sense of self is highlighted by these research, which shows how shifts in narrative identity directly affect the intensity and course of mourning reactions that follow the death of a loved one.