Type of Writing Task and College Students' Meaning Making Following a Romantic Breakup
Abstract
In this study, the authors examined the potential effects of type of writing task (loss/gain vs. general prompt) on the narrative content offered by college students (N= 41) who experienced romantic breakup. Qualitative analyses indicated differences based on type of writing task. Students who received the loss/gain prompt exhibited more cognitive, balanced, and complex responses, whereas those who received the general prompt offered more emotional and factual accounts of their experience.
Romantic breakups are a frequent and developmentally expected life event for college students, and students often seek counseling for issues related to a romantic breakup. Research suggests that college students are likely to experience a romantic breakup (Monroe, Rohde, Seeley, & Lewinsohn, 1999) and that such relationship endings can be distressing experiences for them (Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2003; Perilloux & Buss, 2008). Developmentally, college students are working to individuate from their parents and to establish mature interpersonal relationships, including romantic relationships, separate from their families of origin (Arnett, 2000; Chickering & Reisser, 1993). Then it is perhaps not surprising that romantic breakups/concerns are among the top reasons listed for college students to seek university counseling services (Diemer, Wang, & Dunkle, 2009; Erdur-Baker, Aberson, Barrow, & Draper, 2006). Research related to potential interventions for use with students who have experienced a romantic breakup would likely be of immediate use to most counseling center staff.
Writing interventions have been successfully used with adults who are facing a number of different life events (Lepore & Smyth, 2002). Much of the recent focus on therapeutic writing has been facilitated by the work of Pennebaker and his colleagues (e.g., Pennebaker, 2003; Smyth & Pennebaker, 2008). The professional literature also contains texts designed to assist clinicians in effectively implementing writing interventions with their clients (e.g., Bolton, Field, & Thompson, 2006). The relationship between written emotional expression and subsequent health has been supported by meta-analyses. Smyth (1998) evaluated the results of 13 outcomes studies and determined that tasks of written expression were associated with enhanced reported physical health, psychological well-being, physiological functioning, and general functioning. Scholars have argued for the use of therapeutic writing with individuals who have a number of different presenting issues, including eating disorders (Schmidt, Bone, Hems, Lessem, & Treasure, 2002), depression (Smith, Leenerts, & Gajewski, 2003), cancer (Larsen, Cumming, Hundleby, & Kuiken, 2003), death loss (O'Connor, Allen, & Kaszniak, 2005), and fibromyalgia (Broderick, Junghaenel, & Schwartz, 2005).
College students, because of their unique developmental phase, may even be more likely than their older adult counterparts to benefit from therapeutic writing tasks. According to developmental theory, college students are in a time of life filled with change, exploration, and often uncertainty (Arnett, 2000). In addition, they are in the midst of developing competency and the capacity to manage their emotions (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). For individuals in this age group, using the scaffolding and structure that a writing task provides may be particularly beneficial. Expressive writing has been used as a beneficial intervention with college students facing issues such as the transition to college (Pennebaker, Colder, & Sharp, 1990), migration (Nandagopal, 2008), negative body image (Earnhardt, Martz, Ballard, & Curtin, 2002), and personal trauma (Burton & King, 2008). Researchers also suggest that confronting conflicting or complex emotions in writing may be helpful for college students in romantic relationships and for those who have experienced relationship breakups (Slatcher & Pennebaker, 2006).
Researchers suggest that with adults in general, directed writing may more effectively assist individuals in establishing a holistic account of a life event than does nondirected writing. When individuals are prompted to write freely about an event, they seem to reflect more on the pain involved than on any other aspect of the experience. Research findings support the idea that people tend to rely on a “peak-end” rule, which causes them to give more weight to peak levels of pain rather than equally weighting all of the surrounding emotions (Stone, Broderick, Kaell, DelesPaul, & Porter, 2000). Overweighting of positive or negative experiences can lead to an inaccurate, biased evaluation of experience. As argued by Kahneman (2000) in his review of the research, “restrospective evaluations of affective episodes are strongly influenced by the affect experienced at singular moments, notably the moment at which affect was most extreme and the final moment. They show little or no sensitivity to duration” (p. 693). Greenberg, Wortman, and Stone (1996) found that people who wrote about real or imagined traumas, especially when they considered the potential benefits of a trauma, reduced their illness-related doctor's visits. King and Miner (2000) asked college students to write about a trauma or some other loss, and their results suggested a similar reduction in illness particularly when individuals were directed to take into account only the potential benefits of a trauma. Segal, Tucker, and Coolidge (2009) randomly assigned college students with “unresolved upsetting experiences” to write about the positive, negative, or both positive and negative feelings that they had about the experience. They found that individuals in all groups benefited from the writing but that the positive feeling group displayed more cognitive changes in their thinking about the upsetting experience and a deeper understanding of the experience than did those in the other groups.
Scholars have argued that loss as a model for conceptualizing life events is a practical and useful approach for working with college student clients, including those who have experienced a romantic breakup. According to Harvey and Miller (1998), a loss occurs when there is a reduction in resources, resources in which there was significant emotional investment. Those working with college students have used similar definitions in their reference to the following life experiences as losses: recovery from addiction (Brooks & McHenry, 2009), graduation from college (Taub, Servaty-Seib, Cousins, 2006), parental divorce (Fiorini & Mullen, 2006), and migration to the United States (Johnson & Sandhu, 2007). A grief and loss approach has been explicitly used and researched with college students experiencing a romantic breakup (e.g., Boals & Klein, 2005; Kaczmarek, Backlund, & Biemer, 1990). College students refer to breakups as major losses. In their qualitative investigation of university students’ experiences of nonmarital breakups, Hebert and Popadiuk (2008) found that participants directly described losing resources such as “an entire social network” and “a form of emotional support” (p. 6).
Research on the potential effects of a targeted (loss/gain-related) versus general writing task for college students who have experienced a romantic break would further the empirical literature while also providing guidance for counseling center clinicians. The current study tested the following hypotheses:
-
Hypothesis 1: A targeted (loss/gain-related) versus general writing task will result in more balanced narratives (positive and negative emotions) on the part of college students who recently experienced the ending of a nonmarital romantic relationship.
-
Hypothesis 2: A targeted (loss/gain-related) versus general writing task will result in more meaning-making processing on the part of college students who recently experienced the ending of a nonmarital romantic relationship.
The study contributes to the current literature on romantic breakup in that it uses a comparative design, examines an intervention easily replicated in clinical practice, reports on the content of the written responses, and uses a college student sample.
Method
Participants and Procedure
Participants were 41 students attending (or recently graduated from) one large midwestern university. Students involved in the study were recruited through ads placed in 50 Facebook groups from this single university. All ads were identical except that 25 included the link to the version of the web-based survey that included the experimental loss/gain prompt and 25 included the link to the version that included the control general prompt. Each of the 50 Facebook groups received either the experimental loss/gain prompt or the general writing prompt. The inclusion criteria were (a) ages 18 to 25 years and (b) experienced the ending of a nonmarital romantic relationship within the previous 2-year period. A total of 60 responses were received (25 experimental and 35 control). However, 12 participants were younger or older than the age inclusion criteria and were not considered in further analyses. In addition, seven respondents did not complete the writing portion of the survey, leaving a final sample of 41 (16 experimental and 25 control). Whether a participant completed the writing portion of the survey did not vary by group, χ2(1, N= 48) = 2.55, p > .05. The method of participant recruitment did not allow for the computation of response rate. Participants were provided an opportunity to enter themselves in a drawing for $50.
The sample included 15 men and 26 women, and most were White/Caucasian (78%, n= 32), followed by international (e.g., from Canada, Singapore, Egypt; 9.8%, n= 4), biracial (2.4%, n= 1), African American (2.4%, n= 1), Hispanic/Latino (2.4%, n= 1), and Asian American (2.4%, n= 1). One participant did not indicate race/ethnicity. Students ranged in age from 18 to 25 years (M= 20.76, SD= 1.74) and were relatively evenly distributed with regard to education (freshmen = 8, 19.5%; sophomores = 10, 24.4%; juniors = 10, 24.4%; seniors = 8, 19.5%; recently graduated undergraduates = 3, 7.3%; graduate students = 2, 4.9%). No differences emerged between the experimental and control groups in terms of race/ethnicity, χ2(5, N= 40) = 3.67, p > .05; age, t(41) = 11.15, p > .05; or education level, χ2(6, N= 41) = 6.40, p > .05. However, the sex distribution differed between the groups, χ2(1, N= 41) = 4.37, p < .05, with more men than would be expected in the experimental condition (nine of 15) than in the control condition (seven of 26).
Time since the ending of the relationship ranged from 3 days to 2 years (M= 184.78 days, SD= 235.96 days). The sample included students who indicated that the breakup had been initiated by them (n= 15, 36.6%), mutually initiated (n= 10, 24.4%), or not initiated by them (n= 16, 39.0%). In terms of current relationship status, most of the sample (n= 37, 90.2%) indicated that they were not currently in a romantic relationship, whereas 9.8% (n= 4) indicated their status as partnered/committed. There were no differences between the experimental and control groups in terms of time since breakup, t(39) =−0.20, p > .05; type of breakup initiation, χ2(2, N= 41) = 2.46, p > .05; or current relationship status, χ2(1, N= 41) = 0.37, p > .05.
Instruments
Demographic/relationship form. Participants responded to factual questions about themselves and their most recent romantic breakup.
Writing task. Participants received one of two writing tasks. Those in the experimental condition received the following loss/gain prompt: “Please write about some of the gains and losses you experienced that you associate with your romantic breakup (100 words minimum).” Those in the control condition received the following general prompt: “Please write about your romantic breakup experience (100 words minimum).” The suggestion of a minimum was used to encourage students to offer more than single statement responses. Although some participants did not provide 100 words, their responses were still considered in the data analysis process.
Analyses
Participants’ responses to the writing prompts were initially combined and placed in one overall data document. This document was read independently by the second and third authors (both familiar with qualitative design and data analyses) to determine if responses included enough substantive material to be analyzed further. Both determined that there were patterns that existed within the data as a whole. Next, the data were divided based on writing task and independently read by both authors. The data were read repeatedly, patterns were noted, and the data were coded using open coding to examine and compare the raw data. The numerous codes generated through open coding were further analyzed through a process of consensus (C. E. Hill, Thompson, & Williams, 1997) into larger conceptual categories and core ideas that explained the experiences of the participants’ romantic breakups (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Definitions of key terms were developed (e.g., psychological approach, rationale, life lesson) also through consensus. Quotations were selected for representativeness/articulation and interpretations were made. Findings were related to existing scholarship on romantic breakups, using a loss/gain model for conceptualizing life events and expressive writing as a therapeutic tool (i.e., selective coding).
In contrast to quantitative research, the qualitative analysis process used was less focused on agreement with preestablished domains and more focused on the voicing and discussing of multiple and varied perspectives and judgments (C. E. Hill et al., 1997). Because a process of consensus was used in analyzing the data, “determining agreement levels would be difficult because the definition of the domains, the content of the core ideas, and the structure of the categories in the cross analysis continually evolve over time” (C. E. Hill et al., 1997, p. 524). However, the remaining researcher (first author) did serve as the auditor of the analysis process and reviewed the judgments regarding coding, development of core ideas, selection of quotations, and interpretations (C. E. Hill et al., 1997; Patton, 2002), contributing to the trustworthiness of the findings.
Although there were no hypotheses made regarding potential differences based on type of breakup initiation or sex, the data were separated and examined based on these variables. Data analyses followed the same process as noted earlier and allowed for exploration of the potential impact of type of breakup initiation and sex on participants’ narrative responses.
Results and Discussion
The primary focus of the present investigation was to test the hypotheses that a targeted (loss/gain-related) versus general writing task would result in more balanced narratives (positive and negative emotions; Hypothesis 1) and more meaning-related processing (Hypothesis 2). The results of the study are provided in the form of general assertions, and each general assertion is followed by a series of supporting assertions. The first assertion (Assertion 1) encompasses findings related to the hypotheses, and a summary of whether each hypothesis was supported is offered after this general assertion is fully addressed (see Primary Analysis). Assertions are then offered in connection with potential data patterns associated with type of breakup initiation (Assertion 2) and sex (Assertion 3), respectively (see Exploratory Analyses). The supporting data quotations chosen represent the comments that were most often heard or to tell a small story that illuminates the subassertion. Many quotes are included so that the voices of the participants are heard. Responses have been edited for spelling and grammatical structure for ease of reading. For example, “I” was capitalized when it was a pronoun, and “strage” was corrected to “strange.”
Primary Analysis: Type of Writing Task
Assertion 1: Type of prompt (loss/gain targeted vs. general) influenced the psychological approach college students applied to writing about a recent romantic breakup. Psychological approach is defined as the manner in which students perceive and implement the task at hand. It includes all of the following aspects of their responses: structure, management of negative material, and nature of meaning-making processing. Making up this large assertion are three supporting assertions. We offer these supporting assertions with interpretations and end this section with an overall statement regarding the acceptance or rejection of each of the study hypotheses.
Supporting Assertion A: The loss/gain prompt was associated with a dichotomized response structure, while the general prompt was associated with a narrative response structure. Students who received the loss/gain prompt provided responses that were divided based on perceived gains and losses. A few participants did not provide their responses in complete sentences.
Losses: in appetite, motivation, self-image, trust in others.
Gains: idea of having more time for “myself.”
Others did use complete sentences and wrote in paragraph form (see the following paragraph), but their responses were clearly driven by the need to address the concepts offered in the prompt.
I believe I lost a really good friend because we had become really super close while in our relationship. We told each other everything and hung out every single day. I gained a lot of free time which I started working more and I was in the middle of joining a club so I hung out with the members more often.
In contrast, students in the general prompt group all responded using complete sentences and, with only a few exceptions, engaged in telling the story of their breakup. They generally offered a segment about their relationship and then explained how the breakup unfolded. There was a factual quality to the responses.
- •
I met my ex in one of my classes during my last semester of university. We both were involved with other people in a more than casual relationship. But, after getting to know each other, there was an instant connection, and we almost simultaneously ended our respective relationships to begin one with each other. It was extremely intense and we were very naturally compatible. I was planning to have her move in with me when she broke it off. Her reasons were that she had only a few months left of school before she graduated, and she had no idea where she was going to be able to find a job in her field.
- •
We dated for nearly 5 years. There was infidelity on his part on multiple instances throughout the relationship. When I ended the relationship we had been having a great and honest relationship for many months. We were also very close to becoming engaged and everything seemed great. I realized that the past was too much of an indicator of how the future may be.
It is important to note that not one participant in the loss/gain group offered the story of his or her breakup in his or her response. In addition, not one participant in the general prompt condition used either the word loss or gain in his or her response. The responses to the loss/gain prompt also tended to be shorter (M words = 81.76) than the responses to the general prompt (M words = 135.67), although the difference (likely due to small sample size) was not statistically significant, t(46) = 1.23, p > .05.
Supporting Assertion B: The loss/gain prompt was associated with reflective and cognitive responses, while the general prompt was associated with more immediate and emotional responses. Although respondents in both groups wrote about negative material, those in the loss/gain group (with two exceptions) offered at least one positive/gain/lesson from the experience, whereas those in the general prompt group rarely did. The loss/gain prompt appeared to facilitate respondents’ ability to step back enough and reflect on their experience in such a way that they were able, often in a seemingly more cognitive way, to generate something beneficial that they had taken from the breakup.
Gains: I have gained more personal freedom; room to grow as an individual. I am free to do as I please more so than before. I have more time on the weekends and evening when I would be traveling to see her or talking on the phone.
Losses: I have certainly lost a sense of security about the future and who I might be with. I don't have anyone else that I talk to as much as we talked, or someone to talk to about the same things and on the same level. Having her as a girlfriend was also a bit of an ego booster.
Gains: I no longer seek to have as much control in my life after realizing someone or something I love could be snatched from me at any moment. My relationship with God has changed fundamentally for the better. I am more humble.
Losses: I still consider myself to have high self-esteem, but sometimes I question my worth to the opposite sex. I have sometimes had difficulty studying because of feelings of sadness and loneliness (not clinical depression). I lost my closest friend and confidante. I invested a lot emotionally in the relationship, hoping it would lead to marriage, and now I am burnt out on dating and don't have the energy to pursue a new relationship.
The general prompt group appeared more focused on the raw emotions of the experience and it may be that the general prompt allowed the respondents to get in touch with their more immediate lived experience of the breakup time period.
- •
It was the strangest thing ever… . I was living with the guy that I thought that was great for me and then one day out of the blue he tells me that he has been faking feeling towards me for a month and that he is going to be moving out… . He leaves me in time of need when I was going through tough times in my life… . When I thought that he was gone forever he comes back to me asking for me to take him back because he could not live without me … so the sucker I was, I took him back and then three days later he moved back to his home town and never called me nor accepted my phone calls… . so it was the avoidance that broke us apart … he just stopped caring … it was the hardest thing for me ever, to have someone tell me something and just avoid me for their own reasons … I am glad that it's over though!
- •
Well, we started to fight a lot. She was always around so I told her that she needed some of her own friends instead of my close friends. I wanted time just to myself and my friends every now and then. That didn't happen and that led to more fighting and eventually a break up. Though this break up was more like an informal relationship, but nothing really changed. After a few months of that we got back together and then that fell apart after a month or so, which was right before my birthday. I found out about 3 months later that my ex-girlfriend's new anniversary was the day after my birthday even though we were still seeing each other on a regular basis. She was playing me and the other guy. We still were seeing each other regularly until about 7 months into her new relationship and fighting almost constantly. She was quite evil in the way she dealt with the whole situation. It took me about 2 years to get over the damage from this relationship. I guess that is why I am writing this now. Maybe someone can learn from my sorrow.
Although all of these responses include data that suggest that the breakups were difficult and challenging, there is a reflective, perhaps somewhat removed, quality in the loss/gain responses that was not present in the general prompt group responses. The cognitive versus more emotional nature of the responses is also apparent in the previous quotes.
Supporting Assertion C: The targeted (loss/gain) versus general writing prompts were associated with distinct meaning-making processes. Students in the loss/gain group wrote responses that were marked by an internal focus on the intrapersonal (e.g., identity, confidence, time) and interpersonal (e.g., trust, security, independence) losses and gains that they had experienced in connection with their romantic breakup. The most common loss was the loss of a special person, someone they could confide in, depend on, and with whom they could have emotional intimacy.
Loss: The loss I experienced was from not being able to see him or tell him honestly how I felt anymore. He's my absolute best friend and missing that presence in my life was incredibly difficult. Above all I miss just cuddling with him and being able to relax into his arms. I've had a difficult semester academically and some days I want some comfort, but there's no one around to give it. But I think I gained a lot from the breakup too. We're both very religious, and I really felt like the relationship helped bring me closer to God, and ever since we've broken up I've relied on God more than ever before.
Gains: A sense of accomplishment that after dating someone for so long I could be out on my own, without a boyfriend and be confident with myself and my girlfriends. I also gained a new relationship since and met someone that has shown me everything my ex didn't. He shows me that relationships can be healthy. Fighting with my ex was a daily thing. I learned a lot what not to do in my last relationship (nagging, picking battles and jealously issues) and am able to bring that into my new relationship.
Losses: I lost my best friend who I had talked to about everything, who got me through times during college I thought I wanted to drop out. He gave me a lot of encouragement and good times. I lost my sex partner, whom I was monogamous with and trusted and felt completely comfortable with. I lost the person I thought my world revolved around and my best friend, whom I loved but had grown to dislike.
Gains/Losses: Some of the gains that I made in my last relationship were gaining experience of what it is like to be in a serious relationship where the possibility of marriage is being discussed. I also gained a better understanding of myself and my family by seeing them through another's eyes. The biggest loss I experienced is the sense of betrayal by someone whom I trusted and counted on more than my own parents. My ex knew everything about me that I knew about myself, and after we broke up we stayed friends, but as soon as she got a new boyfriend, she completely cut off contact, and would not return an e-mail with even a courtesy reply.
Although more diverse in nature, the most common gain was related to freedom: freedom, space, and time to focus on self, school, and/or other relationships. All of the responses offered as follows are segments of quotes used elsewhere.
- •
I gained a lot of free time which I started working more and I was in the middle of joining a club so I hung out with the members more often.
- •
I have gained more personal freedom: room to grow as an individual.
- •
Idea of having more time for myself.
- •
The one good thing that came out of my ex's betrayal of me is that it brought me closer to my family than I ever have been in my entire life.
In addition, the students in the loss/gain group offered a number of life lessons that they took from the experience.
- •
And I think I've gained the knowledge that it's still possible to be friends with someone even after they've left. The entire dating experience was good for me and I learned a lot, even though the aftermath can be rather painful. I think I will be a better girlfriend to guys in the future because of him.
- •
I learned that relationships with those you work with, or interact with normally on a daily basis are not recommended, and difficult to break up. I also learned that some gals are very different when you get them alone, as opposed to their personalities in public settings.
- •
I gained a lot of respect for myself and in the end I learned the only way for me to be really happy is to learn how to make myself happy first. I also learned that if someone lies to you about stupid stuff he's probably lying to you about important stuff too … seems obvious I know, and that if he constantly thinks you're cheating on him and you clearly aren't, then he's probably the one doing the cheating.
Students in the general prompt group also offered responses indicative of a meaning-making process but with an external focus on the rationale behind and the why associated with the breakup. Their narratives indicated two patterns associated with meaning making. The first was a focus on ascribing blame to the cause of the ending of the relationship.
- •
He left me because he was the typical “frat guy.” He was someone who wanted to get drunk and sleep around. After our breakup, I later learned that he in fact did achieve his goals of drinking heavily and sleeping with several women. To this day, seeing him brings up those bad memories and makes me extremely upset.
- •
First I didn't talk to her for almost a week straight … she was working a lot of hours. And one day I decided to go over to her house and I found her and her ex-boyfriend having sex on the kitchen table, once seeing this I called her a fucking slut and went home!
- •
The romantic breakup was initiated by my ex. He never gave me a clear reason as to why we were ending things which I feel made it harder to accept. He would blame everything on me, and tell me that it was my fault that we no longer got along. He took none of the blame upon himself and at the same time never could give me a direct answer as to why we were breaking up. It ended poorly with us no longer being able to talk to each other with respect, so we no longer even see or talk to each other at all.
The second pattern included suggestions that the breakup was meant to be, for the best, or was somehow fated.
- •
We had been in a long distance relationship for 3 years. So, it was long distance from the start. Then we moved to the same city, so it was no longer a long distance relationship. About 2 months before we broke up she moved to Lansing Michigan, so we were in a long distance relationship again. However, the distance between us was much farther than before so that we couldn't spend every weekend together. We both started acting strange and then wound up agreeing that maybe we shouldn't see each other (as if we were anyway) anymore.
- •
Well, he stated that he was holding me back, which I did not fully agree with. The deal breaker was when he said that I was too ambitious with too many goals. He also said that his grandma thought that I wouldn't want to breakup because I can not live without a man. I was upset about the breakup, but after knowing how he reacted and the poor reasoning, then I also decided that it was for the best.
- •
Not much to say, we weren't meant for each other.
Assertion 1 and its associated supporting assertions suggest partial support for both of the study hypotheses. More specifically, the data did indicate that the loss/gain prompt resulted in responses that were more balanced (positive and negative) than the general writing task prompt responses. However, the balance in content was more cognitive than it was emotional. The general writing prompt appeared to facilitate more emotional responses than did the loss/gain prompt, and most of the emotional focus was negative and painful in nature. Therefore, Hypothesis 1 was partially supported because the targeted (loss/gain-related) task resulted in more balanced narratives than the general writing task, but the balance was in cognitive rather than emotional content. Hypothesis 2 was also partially supported. Although both prompts appeared to facilitate meaning making, the responses offered by the group that received the targeted (loss/gain-related) prompt were more thoughtful, reflective, and, in many ways, mature than were the responses offered by those who received the general prompt. As a reminder, there were no age, sex, time since breakup, or type of breakup initiation differences between these two groups, but the depth of meaning that the groups made out of the breakup experience was quite distinct. It is likely that the difference in the content was connected with the type of prompt each group received. Hypothesis 2 was partially supported because both groups appeared to engage in meaning making, but the meaning-making processing used by the loss/gain group was richer than was that used by the general writing group.
Consistent with previous scholarship (Kahneman, 2000), students who were generally prompted to retrospectively consider their breakup experience did appear to focus most on the extreme effect of pain. In contrast, students who were prompted to consider both losses and gains wrote about both positive and negative aspects of the experience and seemed to exhibit more cognitive changes and a deeper understanding of the breakup (Segal et al., 2009).
Exploratory Analyses
Type of Breakup Initiation
Although it is not connected with the hypotheses tested in the present investigation, we believed it was important to analyze the data based on type of breakup initiation because this variable has been a focus of consideration in past studies focused on romantic breakups (e.g., Thompson & Spanier, 1983). We offer one assertion associated with type of breakup initiation. Making up this large assertion are three supporting assertions. We offer these supporting assertions with interpretations.
Assertion 2: Type of breakup initiation interacted with development to affect college students’ perceptions of and meanings ascribed to the ending of a recent romantic relationship. Patterns that could be easily connected with Chickering's (1969; Chickering & Reisser, 1993) seven vectors of psychosocial development emerged when the data were analyzed based on type of breakup initiation. Making up this large assertion are three supporting assertions.
Supporting Assertion A: Students who were not initiators of the breakup expressed surprise and even a sense of being ambushed by the breakup. It is possible that students’ lack of interpersonal competence (Chickering & Reisser, 1993) did not allow them to tune into what was happening with their partner to such an extent that they truly did not have any sense that the breakup was approaching.
- •
[He] broke up with me really suddenly and out of the blue, the previous night we had planned to see a movie the next day and then all of a sudden he broke up with me the next day. His reasoning is acceptable, that we need to focus on God more than on each other but the suddenness of the break up still hurt like hell and it hurts even more because I can't talk to him at all and I feel like I need to in order to deal.
- •
The long-term relationship I was very committed to and happy with, to the point where we'd put a deposit on a house where we were going to share a room at uni next year, ended out of the blue when my boyfriend cheated on me when he was drunk one night. It was really sudden, I found out pretty immediately and then in the end my boyfriend was the one to decide we were over.
Supporting Assertion B: Students who were not initiators of the breakup expressed significant pain associated with the breakup. The level of pain in the responses of students who did not initiate the breakup was clearly stronger than that of students in the mutual initiator and initiator groups. It may be that the students’ inability to manage their emotions (Chickering & Reisser, 1993) contributes to their feeling devastated following a breakup, particularly when they had no anticipation of the end (Amato, 2000; Sprecher, 1994).
- •
I was completely heart broken.
- •
I was devastated as I was so committed to him and we spoke on the phone everyday … I still feel the pain as I am still in love with him.
- •
Since being broken up with, I have experienced a broken heart, depression, suicidal thoughts, self-destructive behaviors, and more depression.
Supporting Assertion C: Students who were initiators of the breakup referenced their partners’ neediness or clingy nature as a primary factor in their decision to end the relationship. Students are in the midst of moving through autonomy toward interdependence (Chickering & Reisser, 1993), and this finding may suggest that they can become particularly concerned about partners who do not allow them the autonomy that they need.
- •
Our breakup was a messy break up, but now we are still friends, except he is still very clingy. He was very clingy to begin with, which is why I broke it up after two and a half years.
- •
I think the breakup was overall a good thing, she was much too clingy, the relationship was not incredible long, only a few months, but we did become extremely close. I feel free-er, I think that we moved way too fast and having the relationship over is like having a monkey off my back. I do miss the closeness though.
- •
At times he would become very self-conscious and constantly ask me different questions to test how much I cared about him. He began expecting me to call him at the minimum three times a day: before work, during lunch and after I got off. He began to portray himself as needy and soon I was yearning for some space. He started getting very upset if I chose to spend the day with my friends instead of with him.
Sex of Respondent
Again, although respondent sex was not a primary factor of focus in the present study, we believed it was important to analyze the data based on this variable. We offer one assertion related to sex of respondent and include supporting quotes and our interpretation of the finding.
Assertion 3: Respondent sex did not influence the psychological approach college students applied to writing about a recent romantic breakup. No patterns emerged when the data were analyzed based on sex. The following responses are labeled by sex to illustrate how similar much of the content was between female and male students.
- •
Break up's are definitely never fun. Some seem to be more devastating than others. For myself, I've decided to either not pursue a new relationship or to keep a new relationship at a distance while I'm in school. No significant other is worth losing focus, concentration or even grades over. (Female)
- •
Loss emotionally, and in many aspects of life. Giving up life to attend school in a faraway place is a difficult decision. Actually gain nothing from the loss, except the concentration on school. (Male)
- •
It was mutual because we just kinda matured and we both decided we wanted different things. Nothing bitter. I am now in a wonderful relationship and wouldn't trade it in for the world! Everything happens for a reason and my last relationship just wasn't gonna work out. It was our junior year and our senior year we had both became different and wanted different things in life. I wanted to go away to college to get a degree and he wanted to wait a couple years before going to college. We didn't really have feelings for each other anymore but we still talk and are friends. We were really good friends beforehand and I almost didn't want to take it to the next level because I didn't want to lose that. Luckily we are still friends afterwards. (Female)
- •
We had been in a long distance relationship for 3 years. So, it was long distance from the start. Then we moved to the same city, so it was no longer a long distance relationship. About 2 months before we broke up she moved to Lansing Michigan, so we were in a long distance relationship again. However, the distance between us was much farther than before so that we couldn't spend every weekend together. We both started acting strange and then wound up agreeing that maybe we shouldn't see each other (as if we were anyway) anymore. (Male)
- •
I was depressed most of the time and was unable to enjoy my break. Along with what I lost I believe I lost someone very special to me and it changed me forever. It really left me heart broken. I don't believe I have ever felt that way before, ever. (Female)
- •
I really wouldn't say I gained anything. I would say that I lost a lot. She was my lady friend, my best friend, my confidant, and my “rock that I cling to in a storm,” to quote Sade. She was the one I called on the way to class. She was the one I would talk to about how much Engineering sucked. I feel like a part of me is missing she had been there for me for 2 years 2 months and 5 days. (Male)
Although we did not make a hypothesis about potential sex differences, the lack of differences is somewhat surprising when viewed in light of existing scholarship. Past research has indicated that college men experience greater distress and more problematic adjustment after a romantic breakup than do their female counterparts (C. T. Hill, Rubin, & Peplau, 1976; Rubin, Peplau, & Hill, 1981). It may be possible that the college student population has changed over the past 25 to 30 years such that sex differences no longer exist. Another possible explanation is the research method used. Furthermore, it may be that men report higher scores on quantitative assessments but that sex differences do not emerge when qualitative narratives are evaluated.
Clinical Implications
The results of this study have implications for the treatment of college students who present with difficulties related to the ending of a romantic relationship. We do not believe that the findings suggest the sole use of a loss/gain targeted writing task in place of a more general writing task. Rather, our understanding of the findings suggests that the two interventions could actually be used together. Students may initially benefit from recalling their breakup experience in an open-ended way. This recollection could allow them to express the significant emotions attached to the experience, while also facilitating a meaning-making process focused on finding an external explanation. Following this broad-based writing experience, students may then benefit from a targeted loss/gain writing task that encourages them to take a step back from their experience and to cognitively reflect and make meaning of the intrapersonal and interpersonal changes they attribute to their breakup. Clinicians interested in learning more about how to dynamically integrate different types of writing into their clinical work are referred to Kerner and Fitzpatrick (2007), who offered a useful and practical guiding structure.
The present findings suggest that a loss/gain targeted prompt may facilitate the cognitive and psychological development of students who have experienced a romantic breakup. Responses of students who received the targeted prompt exhibited more qualities of Perry's (1968) position of multiplicity, and in some cases relativism, while the responses of students who received the general prompt were more dualistic in nature. We believe that the loss/gain prompt could have created a level of cognitive disequilibrium that encouraged students to think beyond the position of dualism. The targeted writing task may also have stretched students in their psychosocial development because the responses of students who received the loss/gain prompt (in contrast to those who received the general prompt) included multiple references to concepts related to establishing identity and developing mature interpersonal relationships (Chickering & Reisser, 1993). It may be possible for clinicians to use a loss/gain prompt (such as that used in the present study) with students to help them progress in their development.
We encourage clinicians working with college students to consider the use of a loss/gain model as an integrating concept when conceptualizing the concerns of their clients. Murray (2005) made an excellent case for the benefits of such an approach, and the work of Harvey and his colleagues (Harvey, 2000; Harvey & Miller, 2000) offers multiple examples of applications of a loss approach to specific adverse life events. There are also quantitative measures available that can assist in assessing the losses and gains (in various life domains) that clients attribute to specific life events (e.g., Perceived Impact of Life Event Scale; Servaty-Seib et al., 2006).
Study Limitations and Future Research
Methodological limitations of the current study include issues related to design and sample. The design of the study was cross-sectional, retrospective, and qualitative. The cross-sectional design of the study does not allow for strong statements regarding causation. Although the recruitment procedures used approximated a process of random assignment, there is no way to determine whether the experimental and control groups differed on some important variable not currently considered. In addition, all participants were asked to reflect back on a romantic breakup that occurred in the past and, in some cases, that occurred 2 years prior to data collection. The accuracy of the students’ retrospective report is an issue worthy of question. Although the qualitative analysis of the writing data is a strength of the present investigation, the inclusion of a quantitative pre–post assessment would have provided additional data regarding the potential differential effect of the writing prompts. The current data do not provide information regarding whether participants perceived and/or experienced positive or negative effects connected with their engagement in the writing tasks.
The current sample is likely biased because of self-selection. The recruitment message indicated that a written response about a recent breakup experience would be requested. It is likely that an a priori selection occurred in that students who were open to the process of writing were more likely to volunteer to participate than those who were not open to providing a narrative about their experience. This idea limits the generalizabilty of the findings.
Future research using longitudinal and mixed method designs is needed. In addition, a larger and more representative sample of students who actually presented to counseling for difficulties related to a romantic breakup would strengthen the literature. Research also is needed that directly assesses the efficacy of writing interventions, such as those examined in the present study, when they are integrated into the therapeutic process.
