A robust empirical literature suggests that individual differences in the thematic and structural aspects of life narratives are associated with and predictive of psychological well-being. However, one limitation of the current field is the multitude of ways of capturing these narrative features, with little attention to overarching dimensions or latent factors of narrative that are responsible for these associations with well-being. In the present study we uncovered a reliable structure that accommodates commonly studied features of life narratives in a large-scale, multi-University collaborative effort. Across three large samples of emerging and mid-life adults responding to various narrative prompts (N = 855 participants, N = 2565 narratives), we found support for three factors of life narratives: motivational and affective themes, autobiographical reasoning, and structural aspects. We also identified a "functional" model of these three factors that reveals a reduced set of narrative features that adequately captures each factor. Additionally, motivational and affective themes was the factor most reliably related to well-being. Finally, associations with personality traits were variable by narrative prompt. Overall, the present findings provide a comprehensive and robust model for understanding the empirical structure of narrative identity as it relates to well-being, which offers meaningful theoretical contributions to the literature, and facilitates practical decision making for researchers endeavoring to capture and quantify life narratives.
A robust empirical literature suggests that individual differences in the thematic and structural aspects of life narratives are associated with and predictive of psychological well-being. However, one limitation of the current field is the multitude of ways of capturing these narrative features, with little attention to overarching dimensions or latent factors of narrative that are responsible for these associations with well-being. In the present study we uncovered a reliable structure that accommodates commonly studied features of life narratives in a large-scale, multi-University collaborative effort. Across three large samples of emerging and mid-life adults responding to various narrative prompts (N = 855 participants, N = 2565 narratives), we found support for three factors of life narratives: motivational and affective themes, autobiographical reasoning, and structural aspects. We also identified a “functional” model of these three factors that reveals a reduced set of narrative features that adequately captures each factor. Additionally, motivational and affective themes was the factor most reliably related to well-being. Finally, associations with personality traits were variable by narrative prompt. Overall, the present findings provide a comprehensive and robust model for understanding the empirical structure of narrative identity as it relates to well-being, which offers meaningful theoretical contributions to the literature, and facilitates practical decision making for researchers endeavoring to capture and quantify life narratives.
Individuals create meaning from the events in their lives, and the ways in which they do this has important implications for identity and well-being. We argue that this is a deeply developmental process. Narrative meaning-making consists of a set of developmentally acquired skills and abilities such that individuals are capable of different forms of meaning creation at different developmental periods. Further, narrative meaning-making emerges differentially across days, weeks, months, and years after an experience, and this event processing takes place within ongoing developmental change. Narrating life experiences both reflects and creates modes of meaningmaking in a complex, reciprocal system. Keywords narratives, meaning-making, development Our selves are at least partly defined by our memories. A long history of cognitive research has tracked the amount, accuracy, and durability of autobiographical memory (see Baddeley, 2004 for a review), but it is only in the past two decades that autobiographical narratives have been examined as a form of identity (McAdams, 1993; McAdams & McLean, 2013). For narrative identity,
Gender differences in autobiographical memory emerge in some data collection paradigms and not others. The present study included an extensive analysis of gender differences in autobiographical narratives. Data were collected from 196 participants, evenly split by gender and by age group (emerging adults, ages 18-29, and young adults, ages 30-40). Each participant reported four narratives, including an event that had occurred in the last 2 years, a high point, a low point, and a self-defining memory. Additionally, all participants completed self-report measures of masculine and feminine gender typicality. The narratives were coded along six dimensions-namely coherence, connectedness, agency, affect, factual elaboration, and interpretive elaboration. The results indicated that females expressed more affect, connection, and factual elaboration than males across all narratives, and that feminine typicality predicted increased connectedness in narratives. Masculine typicality predicted higher agency, lower connectedness, and lower affect, but only for some narratives and not others. These findings support an approach that views autobiographical reminiscing as a feminine-typed activity and that identifies gender differences as being linked to categorical gender, but also to one's feminine gender typicality, whereas the influences of masculine gender typicality were more context-dependent. We suggest that implicit gendered socialization and more explicit gender typicality each contribute to gendered autobiographies.
This study examined the underlying factor structure of 15 narrative meaning-making indices for narratives of stressful events, and explored the incremental validity of the narrative factor solution over and above general personality traits in predicting various indices of psychological well-being. Two-hundred and twenty four undergraduates (M = 19.2 years, SD = 2.1; 114 males and 110 females; 67.6% Caucasian, 12.0% East Asian, 7.6% African-American, 4.0% South Asian, 2.2% Hispanic, and 6.7% as mixed or Other origin) wrote about the most traumatic experience in their life, and completed a series of psychological questionnaires. The narratives were coded in 15 ways theoretically derived from the narrative meaning-making literature. A series of exploratory structural equation models indicated that a four-factor solution best approximated the data. The four factors were: positive processing, negative processing, integrative meaning, and structure. All four factors related differentially to indices of well-being over and above traits. There appear to be four distinct, but related, factors of narrative meaning-making for memories of stressful events, which shed light on the nuanced relations with well-being.
Understanding how people turn episodes in time into subjectively meaningful narratives can shed light on adaptive meaning-making processes. Bridging attachment theory and narrative meaning making may elucidate how individuals distinctively narrate highly stressful and traumatic memories and whether such expression matters for psychological health. Single trauma narratives from 224 college participants were coded along dimensions of attachment theory, exploration and support seeking. Attachment style, stress-related growth, and event-related stress were also measured. Narrative exploration and support seeking were predictors of growth and stress, respectively, after controlling for personality traits and attachment. Importantly, we showed attachment moderates the relationship between narrative meaning making and psychological growth and stress. The relation between higher narrative exploration and increased growth levels was weaker for more avoidantly attached individuals, while the relation between lower narrative support seeking and increased stress levels was stronger for more anxiously attached individuals. Our findings indicate narrative processes matter for psychological health and may be utilized to different degrees depending on the narrator's attachment style.
In this study, we considered connections between the content of immediate trauma narratives and longitudinal trajectories of negative symptoms to address questions about the timing and predictive value of collected trauma narratives. Participants (N = 68) were individuals who were admitted to the emergency department of a metropolitan hospital and provided narrative recollections of the traumatic event that brought them into the hospital that day. They were then assessed at intervals over the next 12 months for depressive and posttraumatic symptom severity. Linguistic analysis identified words involving affect (positive and negative emotions), sensory input (sight, sound, taste, touch, and smell), cognitive processing (thoughts, insights, and reasons), and temporal focus (past, present, and future) within the narrative content. In participants' same-day narratives of the trauma, past-focused utterances predicted greater decreases in depressive symptom severity over the next year, d = -0.13, whereas cognitive process utterances predicted more severe posttraumatic symptom severity across time points, d = 0.32. Interaction analyses suggested that individuals who used fewer past-focused and more cognitive process utterances within their narratives tended to report more severe depressive and posttraumatic symptom severity across time, ds = 0.31 to 0.34. Overall, these findings suggest that, in addition to other demographics and baseline symptom severity, early narrative content can serve as an informative marker for longitudinal psychological symptoms, even before extensive narrative processing and phenomenological meaning-making have occurred.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.