The Relationship of Grief Reactions with Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies and Intolerance of Uncertainty in Adults

Background/Objectives: Grief following the death of a loved one may be associated with cognitive emotion regulation strategies and responses to uncertainty. This study examined the relationships between grief, cognitive emotion regulation strategies, and intolerance of uncertainty among adults who had lost a loved one and whether grief differed according to demographic and loss-related characteristics. Methods: The sample comprised 304 adults aged 18–65 years who had experienced the death of a loved one 6–24 months previously. Data were collected using the Demographic Information Form, Grief Scale, Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire, and Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale. Independent-samples t-tests, one-way analysis of variance, Pearson correlation, and regression analyses were conducted. Results: After adjustment for multiple comparisons, grief was not significantly associated with age (r = −0.012) or time since loss (r = −0.053), but was positively associated with emotional closeness (r = 0.549, Holm-adjusted p < 0.001) and perceived social support (r = 0.202, Holm-adjusted p = 0.001). Grief was positively associated with self-blame (r = 0.445), rumination (r = 0.157), catastrophizing (r = 0.532), and blaming others (r = 0.348), and negatively associated with acceptance (r = −0.162), positive refocusing (r = −0.192), refocus on planning (r = −0.148), and positive reappraisal (r = −0.192); these associations remained significant after Holm adjustment. Putting into perspective was not significantly associated with grief after adjustment for multiple comparisons. Intolerance of uncertainty was positively associated with grief (r = 0.447, p < 0.001). In the hierarchical regression analysis, demographic and loss-related covariates accounted for 44.7% of the variance in grief scores (R2 = 0.447). Adding cognitive emotion regulation strategies accounted for an additional 18.2% (ΔR2 = 0.182, p < 0.001), and intolerance of uncertainty accounted for a further 1.1% (ΔR2 = 0.011, p = 0.020). The final model accounted for 64.0% of the variance (R2 = 0.640, adjusted R2 = 0.603). Conclusions: Specific cognitive emotion regulation strategies and greater intolerance of uncertainty were associated with grief levels, with self-blame, rumination, catastrophizing, and blaming others showing positive associations with grief, whereas acceptance, positive refocusing, refocus on planning, and positive reappraisal showed negative associations. These findings highlight the relevance of cognitive emotion regulation and intolerance of uncertainty to individual differences in grief; however, given the cross-sectional design, the observed associations should not be interpreted as establishing temporal or causal relationships.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Healthcare
Published
2026-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14193342
Primary Topic
Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Relationship of Grief Reactions with Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies and Intolerance of Uncertainty in Adults

Elif Yöyen, Rana Şan
Healthcare
Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
article

The Relationship of Grief Reactions with Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies and Intolerance of Uncertainty in Adults

Elif Yöyen, Rana Şan
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Grief following the death of a loved one may be associated with cognitive emotion regulation strategies and responses to uncertainty. This study examined the relationships between grief, cognitive emotion regulation strategies, and intolerance of uncertainty among adults who had lost a loved one and whether grief differed according to demographic and loss-related characteristics. Methods: The sample comprised 304 adults aged 18–65 years who had experienced the death of a loved one 6–24 months previously. Data were collected using the Demographic Information Form, Grief Scale, Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire, and Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale. Independent-samples t-tests, one-way analysis of variance, Pearson correlation, and regression analyses were conducted. Results: After adjustment for multiple comparisons, grief was not significantly associated with age (r = −0.012) or time since loss (r = −0.053), but was positively associated with emotional closeness (r = 0.549, Holm-adjusted p < 0.001) and perceived social support (r = 0.202, Holm-adjusted p = 0.001). Grief was positively associated with self-blame (r = 0.445), rumination (r = 0.157), catastrophizing (r = 0.532), and blaming others (r = 0.348), and negatively associated with acceptance (r = −0.162), positive refocusing (r = −0.192), refocus on planning (r = −0.148), and positive reappraisal (r = −0.192); these associations remained significant after Holm adjustment. Putting into perspective was not significantly associated with grief after adjustment for multiple comparisons. Intolerance of uncertainty was positively associated with grief (r = 0.447, p < 0.001). In the hierarchical regression analysis, demographic and loss-related covariates accounted for 44.7% of the variance in grief scores (R2 = 0.447). Adding cognitive emotion regulation strategies accounted for an additional 18.2% (ΔR2 = 0.182, p < 0.001), and intolerance of uncertainty accounted for a further 1.1% (ΔR2 = 0.011, p = 0.020). The final model accounted for 64.0% of the variance (R2 = 0.640, adjusted R2 = 0.603). Conclusions: Specific cognitive emotion regulation strategies and greater intolerance of uncertainty were associated with grief levels, with self-blame, rumination, catastrophizing, and blaming others showing positive associations with grief, whereas acceptance, positive refocusing, refocus on planning, and positive reappraisal showed negative associations. These findings highlight the relevance of cognitive emotion regulation and intolerance of uncertainty to individual differences in grief; however, given the cross-sectional design, the observed associations should not be interpreted as establishing temporal or causal relationships.

HealthcareVol. 14(19)
Sakarya University (TR), Maltepe University (TR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.