The Dual Process Model of Grief: Coping With Loss and Restoration
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 9, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Grief, Loss & Bereavement · Written by Artificial Sapiens
The dual process model of grief explains how people adapt to a death by moving between two kinds of demands: experiencing and responding to the loss, and managing the changes that life now requires. This movement is called oscillation. A bereaved person might cry while looking at photographs in the morning, concentrate on work or a household problem in the afternoon, and feel the absence again that evening. Each response can have a place within bereavement.
Developed by researchers Margaret Stroebe and Henk Schut, the dual process model of coping with bereavement offers a framework for understanding why grief can be emotionally intense and yet coexist with moments of ordinary activity, distraction, humor, competence, pleasure, or relief. Its foundational paper describes loss-oriented stressors, restoration-oriented stressors, and adaptive movement between confronting and setting aside different demands. The original explanation appears in Stroebe and Schut's 1999 paper.
The model is a research-based description of coping, not a clinical diagnosis, a compulsory sequence, or a schedule for recovery. It applies most directly to bereavement after someone's death. Its concepts can illuminate other major losses, but studies of death-related grief cannot automatically establish the same processes for every non-death loss.
For related context, see Grief: Psychological Responses to Loss.
What is the dual process model of grief?
The dual process model of coping with bereavement (DPM) proposes that bereaved people encounter two broad classes of stressors and change their attention and behavior in response. Loss-oriented coping centers on the person who died and the experience of their absence. Restoration-oriented coping centers on the secondary changes produced by the death, such as reorganizing practical life, relationships, identity, responsibilities, and daily routines. Oscillation describes movement between engagement with and avoidance of these challenges.
The word process matters: the model describes activity over time, including shifts within one hour, across a week, and across longer periods of adjustment. The two orientations are patterns of attention and coping rather than stable personality types. One person can show both, and a single action may contain elements of each. A decade after the model was proposed, its authors emphasized further empirical testing of these processes and of their interaction, as discussed in their 2010 theoretical review.
A central insight is that adaptation can involve brief distance from painful grief as well as moments of direct contact with it. Setting grief aside to cook dinner, laugh with a friend, or solve a financial problem can be a useful part of coping. Continuing practical routines need not mean reduced love or forgetting. Conversely, crying, longing, visiting a meaningful place, or speaking about the deceased can be part of normal adaptation.
The three central components
1. Loss-oriented coping: attending to the death and its meaning
Loss orientation concerns the death itself and the person's relationship with the deceased. Examples include longing, sadness, anger, guilt, disbelief, recalling memories, handling the person's belongings, thinking about an unfinished conversation, attending memorial rituals, and trying to understand how life has changed. Loss orientation may involve approaching memories and emotions, but it can also include avoiding some thoughts or reminders when they feel overwhelming.
The experience is often relational: one grieves a person, a shared future, recurring conversations, familiar places, daily rituals, and the role the relationship played in identity. The intensity of the response varies across people and situations. Someone may experience acute sadness on an anniversary, a pang while shopping, and tenderness while hearing the deceased person's favorite music. The model makes room for these fluctuations without forcing them into a fixed sequence.
Loss-oriented coping may be private, interpersonal, spiritual, cultural, physical, or practical. For one person, it looks like telling stories; for another, silent contemplation or a religious rite. Some people express grief readily, whereas others feel it mainly through fatigue, restlessness, difficulty concentrating, or bodily tension. These differences do not determine whether a person cared deeply about the deceased.
2. Restoration-oriented coping: adapting to a changed life
Restoration orientation addresses the practical, social, and psychological tasks created by the death. A bereaved spouse might learn to manage finances that the deceased once handled, take on caregiving responsibilities, renegotiate family roles, reconnect with friends, or rebuild a daily schedule. Restoration can also involve choosing a new activity, recovering a sense of competence, and exploring who one is under changed circumstances.
The term restoration can be misleading if interpreted as returning to the exact life that existed before the death. In this model it refers to coping with changes and demands, not reaching a prescribed emotional endpoint. A new routine may coexist with ongoing sorrow and an enduring inner relationship with the person who died. Such changes can be difficult even when they are necessary, especially when resources, time, income, housing, caregiving, or supportive relationships are limited.
Restoration includes stress as well as relief. Handling legal paperwork, arranging childcare, responding to relatives, or returning to employment may create secondary burdens. Someone who feels energized by learning a skill may later feel guilty about doing well. The model recognizes that adapting to the changed environment is a substantial part of bereavement rather than an unrelated distraction. Empirical work with bereaved older adults highlights the uneven relevance of different restoration tasks; see Bennett, Gibbons, and Mackenzie-Smith (2010).
3. Oscillation: moving between the two orientations
Oscillation is the model's signature process. It means that a person engages with one set of demands, then another, sometimes deliberately and sometimes because of circumstances. A person might spend time with memories of the deceased, take a break to deal with the day's logistics, return to grief when reminded of a shared place, and then focus on a friend's visit. The movement can be uneven, overlapping, and difficult to notice.
Oscillation is not a requirement to spend equal amounts of time in each orientation or to alternate according to a schedule. The original model emphasizes regulation and respite: people have finite emotional and practical resources, so constant confrontation with every painful reminder or every new duty may be exhausting. Shifts in attention can allow engagement with different demands when the person has capacity. Whether a particular shift is helpful depends on its consequences, context, duration, and flexibility.
Sometimes the same act combines both orientations. Planning a memorial can involve honoring a relationship and organizing transportation, food, money, and family communication. Looking through old photographs while making a family album may evoke longing and also create a workable new ritual. A 2025 published participatory study, originally online in 2024, found support for the two orientations among nine bereaved participants while observing that they overlapped and that the oscillation process remained complex. The small study also questioned whether 'time off from grief' is experienced as clearly as the model proposes. Larsen, Hybholt, and O'Connor.
Loss-oriented and restoration-oriented coping: a practical comparison
When attention is loss-oriented, the central question is often 'What has happened, whom do I miss, and what does this absence mean?' Examples include crying, yearning, remembering, storytelling, expressing anger, visiting the grave, or revisiting the last conversation. When attention is restoration-oriented, the question is often 'How do I handle life as it is now?' Examples include meals, work, paperwork, parenting, rebuilding routines, meeting people, learning new skills, and making decisions.
Neither orientation is inherently healthier than the other. Both can contain difficult feelings, and both can include avoidance. Refusing every reminder indefinitely may interfere with adjusting to the loss; consistently refusing necessary changes can also create difficulties. On the other hand, an intentional pause from memories or a temporary postponement of nonurgent decisions may be protective when the person is flooded or exhausted. Interpretation depends on whether coping remains flexible and supports functioning over time.
A useful example is a person who loses a parent. The death may bring intense longing and the need to look through family photographs. It may also require organizing care for another relative, sorting paperwork, and revisiting family responsibilities. The same person may feel relief when a difficult caregiving period ends, sadness that the relationship has ended, and frustration with practical demands. The DPM accommodates those coexisting reactions without treating them as contradictions.
How oscillation appears in everyday grief
Example: a bereaved partner
After the death of a partner, someone may wake up expecting to hear a familiar voice, cry while preparing breakfast, then spend an hour arranging bills. Later they might walk with a neighbor and feel unexpectedly lighthearted, only to experience a wave of loneliness at bedtime. The morning and bedtime experiences are predominantly loss-oriented; managing finances and reestablishing activity are predominantly restoration-oriented. A short social outing can contain either or both, depending on what it means to the person.
These movements are neither proof of improvement nor signs of worsening in isolation. A difficult evening after a productive afternoon does not mean adjustment has failed. Equally, an apparently efficient week does not establish that the person has processed the loss. The model encourages attention to patterns over time, the burden of practical demands, the availability of support, and the individual's own sense of what is helpful.
Example: grief after the death of a child
Parents grieving a child may remain deeply engaged with the child's memory, the child's place within the family, anniversaries, and imagined futures while also managing surviving children's needs, employment, relationships, or care of their own health. Moments of practical focus may be forced by necessity rather than chosen. Applying the model respectfully means recognizing the scale of the loss and the individual's context instead of telling parents to increase their restoration activities or reach a certain balance.
Example: a bereaved teenager
An adolescent may move between intense sadness, schoolwork, friendships, online interaction, sleep changes, and concern about family members. Ordinary activity can be important, yet adolescents may struggle when others assume that playing games or spending time with friends means the death has ceased to matter. Developmental stage, school environment, parental support, family culture, and exposure to traumatic circumstances can shape the response. An adult's framework should not become a timetable or a judgment about how a young person must grieve.
Example: an older adult facing multiple changes
An older person may grieve a spouse while adapting to changes in transportation, household management, finances, housing, health, social networks, or caregiving. Restoration tasks can be especially demanding when income or mobility changes. Some tasks are shared with others; others require time and help to learn. The model draws attention to these practical consequences, while research on widowhood has shown that the value and frequency of particular strategies differ across individuals. Bennett and colleagues' two-study analysis.
What does the research actually support?
The most established contribution of the dual process model is conceptual: it provides a useful account of why bereavement involves attention to the deceased, attention to changes in daily life, and movement between these concerns. The original 1999 paper was a theoretical proposal supported by the research then available. Later work has examined its component processes through interviews, measurements of daily life, observational studies, and interventions. Its broad explanatory value and its more specific causal claims deserve separate evaluation.
In a systematic review published in 2021, Jennifer Fiore screened 474 publications, reviewed 86 full texts, and included 22 quantitative or mixed-methods studies covering material up to June 2016. The review concluded that the model represented important aspects of bereavement and offered a useful framework. It also emphasized the need for stronger tests of oscillation, consistent measures, and further intervention research. Its conclusions do not mean that every predicted pathway or therapeutic technique has been definitively validated.
Research involving older bereaved adults adds more nuance. An analysis published in OMEGA reported variation in use of restoration strategies and differences in coping patterns across individuals. A separate study developed the Inventory of Daily Widowed Life to measure loss-oriented and restoration-oriented activities among 163 widowed adults and reported associations with adjustment-related outcomes. These associations are informative but cannot show that prescribing a specific ratio of activity would improve clinical outcomes. Inventory development study.
A randomized study of 298 recently widowed adults aged 50 or older compared a group combining loss- and restoration-oriented sessions with a more traditional loss-oriented group. Both groups improved and reported high satisfaction, while the reported outcomes in the initial phase did not establish broad superiority of the dual-process intervention. Participants in the combined group reported similar loss-oriented improvements despite fewer sessions focused on loss. This result suggests potential utility for practical-skills work but does not prove that DPM-based groups are the best treatment for every bereaved person.
More recent qualitative inquiry supports taking overlap and individual experience seriously. Larsen, Hybholt, and O'Connor's participatory study included a small group of bereaved adults reflecting together over repeated meetings. Participants recognized loss and restoration themes, but the two often co-occurred. The sample was small, the method was qualitative, and the findings cannot establish population prevalence, clinical effectiveness, or a universal oscillation schedule.
What remains uncertain?
Three questions remain especially important. First, oscillation has proved difficult to measure consistently: should researchers count shifts in attention, emotion, behavior, or specific stressors, and over what time interval? Second, a coping strategy may be useful in one setting and costly in another, so the same behavior cannot be classified as adaptive without its context. Third, intervention studies differ in population, design, duration, and outcome measures. The systematic-review evidence supports the framework more strongly than it supports precise prescriptions for how frequently someone should shift orientations.
A model can be clinically useful without determining an individual's trajectory. The distinction between describing grief and predicting a person's outcome is essential. Neither spending many hours thinking about the deceased nor focusing strongly on work automatically predicts prolonged grief disorder, depression, or recovery. The best questions concern distress, flexibility, safety, supports, meaning, impairment, and changes over time.
Dual process model vs five stages of grief
The familiar five-stage framework is often presented as denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. The dual process model organizes coping around two interrelated domains and movement between them, rather than an expected progression through emotional stages. An individual can experience disbelief, anger, longing, relief, joy, and acceptance in many combinations. The dual-process account offers a way to understand activity and adaptation without requiring that emotions arrive in an order.
Researchers have criticized the public portrayal of a universal five-stage sequence. A systematic appraisal of internet depictions by Avis, Stroebe, and Schut found that misleading presentations may create pressure to grieve 'correctly.' The difference matters in daily care: asking what the person faces today and what support is available is more useful than assigning them to a stage. The stages framework and its research controversies warrant their own treatment; this article's canonical focus remains the dual process model.
Dual process model vs continuing bonds
Continuing bonds refers to an ongoing inner, symbolic, or social relationship with the deceased through memory, values, rituals, conversations, and personal identity. The dual process model addresses how coping attention moves between loss-related experiences and the changed demands of living. Continuing bonds can feature within loss-oriented activities, and they may also shape restoration-oriented decisions such as honoring shared values through a new routine or community activity.
The quality and meaning of a continuing bond matter. Connection can be comforting, painful, conflictual, or mixed, and research does not establish that one specific form works best for everyone. Stroebe, Schut, and Boerner's theoretical integration emphasized the need to examine individual attachment processes and outcomes rather than declaring either retaining or relinquishing connections universally beneficial.
Dual process model vs grief work and task models
Earlier grief-work assumptions often emphasized confronting and processing grief as the principal route to adaptation. The dual process model expanded the analytic frame by placing changing life roles, practical burdens, and temporary shifts away from grief inside coping itself. This helps explain why continuous emotional expression is neither a universal need nor a suitable requirement for every bereaved person. The model also extends task-based accounts by emphasizing dynamic movement rather than a checklist of duties completed in a set order.
People may benefit from discussing the deceased, making meaning of the relationship, or approaching painful reminders when they are ready. Other people may prefer activity, companionship, cultural ritual, privacy, structured help, or time. Social expectations can influence what seems permissible, and loss-focused and restoration-focused forms of coping may be valued differently within families and communities.
How to use the dual process model in daily life
A practical application is to notice the range of demands in your own situation. What currently draws your attention to the person who died? Which changes in daily life need support? Are you able to move between experiences at a tolerable pace, or does one area feel impossible to approach? There is no recommended percentage of time for each orientation, and the model provides no validated self-scoring rule.
A gentle reflection exercise
First, identify a loss-focused moment without forcing yourself to intensify it: perhaps remembering a story, acknowledging loneliness, listening to music, or speaking the person's name. Notice what happens emotionally and physically. You can stop or seek companionship if the experience becomes overwhelming. Next, identify one manageable restoration task: a meal, an appointment, a phone call, paperwork, sleep routine, or asking for help with a responsibility that changed after the death.
Then notice how your attention naturally shifts. Some days you may be immersed in memories; other days immediate logistics dominate. You can give yourself permission to accept rest, practical assistance, moments of ordinary enjoyment, and meaningful contact with the past. The aim is to find a sustainable response to real needs, not to complete a theory-driven program.
If writing is useful, a short journal entry might describe what brought the deceased to mind, what daily demand required attention, which supports helped, and what felt too difficult. This is a reflective tool rather than an assessment instrument or clinical treatment. There is no evidence that everyone benefits from grief journaling, and a person who dislikes writing can use conversation or another culturally comfortable means of reflection.
Supporting a grieving person through both orientations
Supporters can help by listening when the bereaved person wishes to speak about the deceased and by offering concrete assistance with changed responsibilities. Sometimes the most helpful response is being present while someone cries; at another time it may be taking a child to school, arranging groceries, helping with paperwork, or spending a comfortable hour together without discussing grief. Ask what kind of help is wanted instead of assuming that either talking or distraction is always preferable.
Avoid interpreting laughter, returning to work, social activity, or a quiet appearance as proof that grief is over. Also avoid urging someone to express emotions on demand. Offers should be specific and realistic: 'I can bring dinner Thursday,' or 'Would you like company when you sort the paperwork?' Families may disagree about memorial rituals, belongings, money, and timelines, so collaborative planning matters.
Support becomes particularly important when bereavement is accompanied by financial instability, social isolation, inaccessible services, discrimination, disrupted housing, or multiple simultaneous losses. The DPM helps identify the practical work of adaptation, but actual support must address the person's resources and constraints rather than merely encouraging resilience.
Cultural and social differences in coping
The model was developed from bereavement research and has been used across different groups, but researchers have warned that broad generalization requires culturally sensitive evidence. What counts as acceptable expression of sorrow, memorial care, help-seeking, collective responsibility, and daily restoration differs across communities and faith traditions. Social obligations after death may themselves be restoration demands, and continuing social rituals may involve both orientations.
Some people are supported by extended family, while others confront loss through individual routines or work. Responses can also vary by gender expectations, age, disability, economic security, migration history, and whether the death was expected or violent. A useful application asks how the person's actual circumstances organize grief rather than measuring everyone against a single cultural ideal of openness, independence, or emotional balance.
Traumatic death and sudden bereavement
A sudden, violent, or disturbing death may involve traumatic reminders, uncertainty, intrusive images, investigations, legal processes, media attention, guilt, or fear. Loss and restoration demands remain relevant, but the person's experience may also include posttraumatic stress symptoms and acute safety needs. The dual process model alone does not assess PTSD, suicidality, or the effects of traumatic exposure, and it should never delay appropriate trauma-informed clinical evaluation.
Practical support following such a death may include companionship, accurate information, assistance with necessary decisions, and access to specialist services. Gentle pacing is appropriate, especially when the person is overwhelmed. A clinician may need to distinguish traumatic re-experiencing and perceived threat from longing for the deceased, as well as recognize situations in which both occur.
Normal grief, depression, PTSD, and prolonged grief disorder
Normal grief encompasses a wide range of painful, changing reactions to bereavement. Bereavement refers to the condition of having lost someone through death; mourning refers to personal and culturally shaped expression of grief. Symptoms can include sadness, yearning, anger, emotional numbness, trouble sleeping, concentration difficulties, and shifting capacity for everyday activities. The dual process model helps organize these experiences but does not label them as disorders.
Major depressive disorder can occur during bereavement and requires careful clinical assessment of a broader depressive syndrome, including persistent low mood or loss of interest and the person's overall functioning. PTSD may involve trauma-related intrusions, avoidance, changes in threat perception, and heightened arousal after a qualifying traumatic event. Prolonged grief disorder centers on persistent separation distress and additional severe grief symptoms that cause clinically significant distress or impairment, exceed cultural expectations, and meet diagnostic timing and other requirements.
Under DSM-5-TR, the death must have occurred at least 12 months earlier for adults, or at least six months earlier for children and adolescents; additional symptoms and impairment are required. ICD-11 specifies a persistent, pervasive grief response for an atypically long period following the loss, at least six months, with substantial impairment and cultural-context consideration. The two systems use different symptom structures and diagnostic approaches. Diagnostic comparison in peer-reviewed research. The model cannot diagnose prolonged grief disorder, and duration alone is never sufficient.
Seek a mental-health assessment when grief remains severely disruptive, distress intensifies or becomes difficult to manage, daily functioning is substantially impaired, or depression, trauma symptoms, substance misuse, or safety concerns arise. Assessment considers the full history, personal and cultural context, duration, symptom pattern, and degree of impairment. It is possible to experience powerful waves of grief for years while continuing to live meaningfully; their existence alone does not establish a disorder.
When does grief counseling or psychotherapy help?
Grief counseling, supportive groups, and professional psychotherapy serve different needs. Supportive counseling may offer space to talk, address practical adjustments, strengthen support networks, or navigate particularly demanding periods. Specialized grief-focused treatment is used when a clinician identifies a persistent and impairing grief condition or another clinical need. A practitioner may draw on the dual process model to understand both emotional loss and restoration tasks without claiming that the model by itself is a validated treatment protocol.
Evidence for clinical treatment should be evaluated directly. A 2024 systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 trials with 2,602 adults found that grief-focused cognitive behavioral therapies reduced prolonged grief symptoms compared with control conditions, while noting evidence limitations. That finding concerns CBT interventions and is not proof that any informal activity inspired by the dual process model will produce comparable outcomes.
Grief groups can be useful for companionship and mutual understanding, particularly when people feel isolated or stigmatized. Preferences vary, and some groups or techniques may not fit a person's needs. When intense symptoms, trauma, severe impairment, or other mental-health concerns are present, a qualified clinician can help determine whether focused treatment, other care, or coordinated medical support is indicated.
What the model does not tell us
The dual process model provides no universal optimal balance, mathematical formula, or precise sequence for recovery. It does not require everyone to talk about the deceased, remove belongings, resume particular activities, forgive someone, find a benefit in the death, or move on. It does not determine the moral meaning of grief or the strength of a relationship. It is a lens for understanding coping demands, with empirically informed strengths and unresolved questions.
A person who mostly attends to necessary tasks may still be deeply grieving. Someone absorbed in memories may be moving through an understandable period following a recent loss. Clinical concern depends on the person's overall experience and impairment, not an arbitrary judgment that they are too loss-oriented or too restoration-oriented. Compassionate support remains responsive to individual preference, practical conditions, and any clinical risks.
Frequently asked questions
Who developed the dual process model of grief?
Psychologists Margaret Stroebe and Henk Schut proposed the dual process model of coping with bereavement in a 1999 article in Death Studies. It was developed to explain the dynamic ways bereaved people confront and temporarily step away from both loss-related and restoration-related stressors. They expanded and revisited the framework in subsequent publications. Original model paper.
What are the two types of coping in the model?
Loss-oriented coping focuses on the person who died and the emotional, relational, and symbolic consequences of their absence. Restoration-oriented coping focuses on managing changed routines, responsibilities, social roles, identity, and life tasks. Individuals may engage in both during the same day or the same activity.
What does oscillation mean in grief?
Oscillation refers to movement between engaging with and stepping away from loss-related and restoration-related demands. It may be intentional, spontaneous, or prompted by outside events. There is no clinically established frequency or ideal ratio.
Does the dual process model say that distraction is healthy?
Distraction can provide needed respite or help a person perform necessary tasks, but its usefulness depends on context. Occasional enjoyable activity and practical focus may coexist with grieving. Persistent, inflexible avoidance that increases distress or prevents essential adaptation may call for further support.
Is it normal to feel happy or laugh while grieving?
Yes. Moments of pleasure, relief, humor, connection, or peace can occur alongside grief. They do not prove that the deceased has been forgotten or that the bond was unimportant. Bereavement reactions vary greatly over time and across people.
Can loss and restoration occur at the same time?
Yes. Organizing a memorial, caring for family traditions, or beginning a routine in honor of the deceased may combine longing, remembrance, practical decisions, and new responsibilities. Qualitative research has specifically noted overlap between orientations. Participatory study.
How is the dual process model different from the five stages?
The dual process model describes two areas of coping and movement between them. The popular five-stage formulation is often interpreted as a sequence of emotional states. Research cautions against treating the stages as a required universal pathway. Review of common portrayals.
Does oscillation mean I am recovering?
Oscillation is a proposed feature of coping and may explain ordinary shifts in attention. One observed shift cannot establish recovery or predict the eventual outcome. A more useful evaluation considers wellbeing, safety, meaningful functioning, support, impairment, and the changing impact of the loss over time.
Can the model be used for divorce, separation, or other non-death losses?
Some clinicians and researchers find the distinction between loss-focused experiences and adjustment tasks conceptually helpful in non-death losses. The model was developed for bereavement following death, so extending its predictions to divorce, displacement, infertility, unemployment, or other experiences requires separate evidence and sensitivity to the differences among losses.
Is the dual process model a treatment for prolonged grief disorder?
No. It is a coping framework that can inform conversations and supportive care. Prolonged grief disorder requires a comprehensive clinical assessment, and evidence-based grief-focused psychotherapy should be evaluated on its own treatment results. A self-described imbalance between orientations is neither a diagnosis nor proof that treatment is required.
What if I feel unable to cope or have thoughts of suicide?
A person who feels unsafe, is considering suicide, or fears they may act on thoughts of self-harm needs immediate human support and appropriate crisis care. Contact local emergency services if danger is imminent, stay with a trusted person when possible, and tell a clinician or crisis service directly what is happening. These concerns deserve a safety response regardless of how long it has been since the death or which coping orientation seems most prominent.
Related Articles
Grief: Psychological Responses to Loss explains common responses to bereavement and the wider context in which this coping model operates.
How Long Does Grief Last? Timelines, Waves, and Adjustment examines how grief changes over time without a fixed timetable.
How to Cope With Grief: Evidence-Based Support covers practical support strategies and when to seek help.
Prolonged Grief Disorder: Symptoms and Diagnosis explains when persistent grief may need specialist assessment.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Prolonged grief disorder. American Psychiatric Association.
Avis, K. A., Stroebe, M., & Schut, H. (2021). Stages of grief portrayed on the internet: A systematic analysis and critical appraisal. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 772696. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.772696.
Bennett, K. M., Gibbons, K., & Mackenzie-Smith, S. (2010). Loss and restoration in later life: An examination of dual process model of coping with bereavement. OMEGA, 61(4), 315–332. DOI: 10.2190/OM.61.4.d.
Caserta, M. S., & Lund, D. A. (2007). Toward the development of an inventory of daily widowed life (IDWL): Guided by the dual process model of coping with bereavement. Death Studies, 31(6), 505–535. DOI: 10.1080/07481180701356761.
Fiore, J. (2021). A systematic review of the dual process model of coping with bereavement (1999–2016). OMEGA, 84(2), 414–458. DOI: 10.1177/0030222819893139.
Komischke-Konnerup, K. B., Zachariae, R., Boelen, P. A., Marello, M. M., & O'Connor, M. (2024). Grief-focused cognitive behavioral therapies for prolonged grief symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 92(4), 236–248. DOI: 10.1037/ccp0000884.
Larsen, L. H., Hybholt, L., & O'Connor, M. (2025; online 2024). Lived experience and the dual process model of coping with bereavement: A participatory research study. Death Studies, 49(6), 743–754. DOI: 10.1080/07481187.2024.2355244.
Lund, D., Caserta, M., Utz, R., & De Vries, B. (2010). Experiences and early coping of bereaved spouses/partners in an intervention based on the dual process model (DPM). OMEGA, 61(4), 291–313. DOI: 10.2190/OM.61.4.c.
Stroebe, M., & Schut, H. (1999). The dual process model of coping with bereavement: Rationale and description. Death Studies, 23(3), 197–224. DOI: 10.1080/074811899201046.
Stroebe, M., & Schut, H. (2010). The dual process model of coping with bereavement: A decade on. OMEGA, 61(4), 273–289. DOI: 10.2190/OM.61.4.b.
Stroebe, M., Schut, H., & Boerner, K. (2010). Continuing bonds in adaptation to bereavement: Toward theoretical integration. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(2), 259–268. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.007.