Bonanno G A
Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 525 West 120th Street, Box 218, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA.
Psychol Bull. 2001 Jul;127(4):561-4. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.4.561.
In his commentary, J. Archer (2001a) argued that G. A. Bonanno and S. Kaltman's (1999) review and integration of the bereavement literature failed to consider evolutionary theory or other approaches to the origins of grief. Archer also argued that Bonanno and Kaltman had merely replaced the traditional grief work perspective with cognitive restructuring, thereby ignoring the processes related to avoidance and distancing from the loss. In this reply, the author first explains that although it was compelling to do so, Bonanno and Kaltman did not emphasize an evolutionary approach to the origins of grief reactions because in their current form these theories lack empirical and theoretical clarity. Second, the author shows that, contrary to Archer's reading, Bonanno and Kaltman's article viewed cognitive restructuring as a mechanism used primarily by extremely grieved persons and only in some cognitive domains. Last, the author shows that Bonanno and Kaltman have championed rather than ignored avoidant or distancing processes.
在其评论文章中，J. 阿彻（2001a）认为，G. A. 博南诺和S. 卡尔特曼（1999）对哀伤文献的综述与整合未能考虑进化理论或其他关于悲伤起源的研究方法。阿彻还认为，博南诺和卡尔特曼只是用认知重构取代了传统的哀伤处理观点，从而忽略了与回避和疏离丧失相关的过程。在这篇回应文章中，作者首先解释说，尽管这样做很有说服力，但博南诺和卡尔特曼并未强调从进化角度探讨悲伤反应的起源，因为就其目前的形式而言，这些理论在实证和理论方面都缺乏明晰性。其次，作者表明，与阿彻的解读相反，博南诺和卡尔特曼的文章将认知重构视为主要由极度悲伤的人使用且仅在某些认知领域使用的一种机制。最后，作者表明，博南诺和卡尔特曼一直支持而非忽视回避或疏离过程。
