- As we wrapped up multiple discussions about revision and feedback, this reading took quite a turn. The opening paragraphs discussing trauma and PTSD were unexpected, as I didn’t know what an article about expressive writing would entail. It also struck a nerve for me since I had just finished watching the documentary about the Menendez brothers.
- As someone who is very passionate about the prison system and the rehabilitation of inmates, I couldn’t help but think about how beneficial this could be in all prisons. Since prisoners were included in the studies, it demonstrates that this approach could help them. So much needs to change within that system, and I see this as a realistic solution that can be implemented without the need for large funding.
- I found it interesting that writing about different topics yielded varied benefits. Coming into this, I didn’t think the specific topics would matter. However, it makes perfect sense that different subjects resonate differently.
- “Not all traumatic events are equally toxic.” (pg.4) This made me think of my boyfriend, who often feels that ‘trauma’ is an overused term in our overly sensitive culture. There’s such a strong desire to be understanding that it overshadows the reality that not all trauma is on the same level.
- “Even though a large number of participants report crying or being deeply upset by the experience, the overwhelming majority report that the writing experience was valuable and meaningful in their lives.” (pg.7) This entire article made me reflect on my personal relationship, or rather my distance, from expressive writing. Whenever I’m recommended journaling, it feels like a chore, and I automatically lose interest. However, I have a public blog where I share my life and experiences. It’s quite contradictory, to say the least.
- “He also found that longer intervals between writing sessions produced larger overall effect sizes, and that males benefited more from writing than did females. (pg.8) Though emotional intelligence has progressed and society is generally more accepting, the reality remains that society doesn’t encourage men to be emotional. Women are raised in a culture of community, sharing, and emotional expression, while men often feel pressured to suppress their feelings. It makes perfect sense why the men benefited more than the women in the study.
- “We recommend that writing researchers and practitioners provide sufficiently open instructions to allow people to deal with whatever important topics they want to write about. As described in greater detail below, the more that the topic or writing assignment is constrained, the less successful it usually is.” (pg.12) I thought it was a bit awkward or uncomfortable to ask someone to write about specific traumatic events. While I understand the necessity for these studies, it still feels strange. For example, asking someone, ‘Can you write about a time you considered suicide?’ is tough. I agree with the sentiment that, generally, people should be allowed to write about what they want.
- “Being able to see things in a positive light, then, might be a critical component to successful adjustment.” (pg.12) Well, of course! Thinking of the glass as half full would naturally lead to better adjustment.
- “However, as evidenced from the mixed condition, if people aren’t able to integrate their perceived benefits into their trauma story in their own way, writing may be ineffective.” (pg.13) One’s ability to see the good that can come from the bad is a sign of maturity and healing. Being able to view different perspectives on a situation is a crucial life skill, regardless of the circumstances.
- “Similarly, in an unpublished project by Lori Stone (2002), students were asked to write about their thoughts and feelings about the September 11 attacks.” (pg.14) Whenever I think about 9/11, I’m reminded of the disconnection many of my peers feel regarding it. Those who are my age or close to it have no recollection of the event, creating a significant distance—even for me. Though it wasn’t long ago, in the minds of many young people, it might as well have happened in the early 1900s.
- “In both cases, we found that people talked with one another at very high rates in the first 2-3 weeks. By the 4th week, however, talking rates were extremely low.” (pg.17) When a recent event occurs, it’s fresh in your mind and feels like a fragile, open wound. As time goes on, you start to compartmentalize in an attempt to move forward.
- “Christensen et al. (1996) preselected students on hostility and found that those high in hostility benefited more from writing than those low in hostility.” (pg.20) I think it’s important to define what ‘hostile’ means. That term and ideology are often weaponized against people who look like me, so I would have liked it to be more clearly defined. What one person finds hostile, another may not, so what exactly constitutes hostility?
- “By extension, writing about an emotional experience in an organized way is healthier than in a chaotic way.” (pg.31) Isn’t the big picture about getting it out and expressing themselves? While it’s helpful for readers if it’s more organized, the priority should be that they express themselves and feel better.
- “Unfortunately, we are not yet at the point of being able to precisely define what is meant by coherent, understandable, or meaningful when it comes to writing about emotional upheavals (cf., Graybeal, Seagal, & Pennebaker, 2002). One person’s meaning may be another’s rumination.” (pg.31)I appreciated that this was acknowledged, as everyone brings a different perspective to the table, making it important to provide space for the nuances. We should apply the same approach to the word ‘hostile.’
Bridging writing theory with writing practice
