2020
DOI: 10.1080/09658211.2020.1828926
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The redemption and contamination research form: exploring relations with narrative identity, personality traits, response styles, and life satisfaction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
2
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The one exception to this was for emotional stability: People who perceived that the event changed them because it was negative, stressful, and reputationally damaging tended to decline in emotional stability both before and after the event. This result is in line with other research that has correlated event characteristics with measured personality change and found that events perceived as more negative were associated with decreases in emotional stability (Haehner et al, 2021; Sutin et al, 2010), and research that has linked contamination narratives to lower emotional stability and life satisfaction (Dunlop et al, 2020). It suggests a commonsensical linkage central to clinical psychology, where lasting event-related increases in anxiety and depression are often attributed to stressful, negative, and interpersonally frictional characteristics of that event (Ormel et al, 2013).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The one exception to this was for emotional stability: People who perceived that the event changed them because it was negative, stressful, and reputationally damaging tended to decline in emotional stability both before and after the event. This result is in line with other research that has correlated event characteristics with measured personality change and found that events perceived as more negative were associated with decreases in emotional stability (Haehner et al, 2021; Sutin et al, 2010), and research that has linked contamination narratives to lower emotional stability and life satisfaction (Dunlop et al, 2020). It suggests a commonsensical linkage central to clinical psychology, where lasting event-related increases in anxiety and depression are often attributed to stressful, negative, and interpersonally frictional characteristics of that event (Ormel et al, 2013).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Among these many thematic and structural features, two dualities (four constructs in total) may be signaled out based on their prevalence and conceptual heft (e.g., Adler, 2012;Dunlop et al, 2020b;McAdams et al, 2001;Wiggins, 1991Wiggins, , 2003. The first is agency and communion.…”
Section: Assessing Narrative Identitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Within narrative identity, redemptive stories often manifest in terms of motifs such as illness to health, suffering to salvation, and rags to riches (see McAdams, 2006). Typically (but not exclusively, see Dunlop et al, 2020b;Perlin & Fivush, 2021), researchers have implemented a dichotomous coding system in which it is determined whether a given life chapter (Dunlop et al, 2018) or key scene (i.e., McAdams et al, 2001) is or is not a redemptive story or contaminated story.…”
Section: Assessing Narrative Identitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Another limitation is that content-coding, as well analyzing each life story scene separately, can lead, as was the case in the current study, to unusable data, like our high points. Future work might want to consider using continuous indicators of the extent to which memories contain affective themes (redemption: e.g., Weston et al, 2016) or even self-report measures (e.g., Dunlop et al, in press) so that more concrete comparisons with existing studies might be possible (e.g., McAdams et al, 2001). However, we recommend using the same method of analysis (content-coding or self-report Likert-scale measures) across affective themes, particularly if exploring age group differences (Alea et al, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%