BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN RESEARCH AND PRACTICE IN BEREAVEMENT: REPORT FROM THE CENTER FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF HEALTH

ABSTRACT

This article discusses issues in bridging the gap between research and practice in the field of bereavement. A conceptual framework is developed that emphasizes that the gulf reflects the lack of exchange and mutual influence between researchers and practitioners. Studies are presented using qualitative and quantitative methods to gain a better understanding of the nature of the gap between research and practice in bereavement. Finally recommendations are made for practitioners, researchers, and organizations to take steps toward more thoroughly integrating bereavement research and practice for the advancement of both.

The Bridging Work Group consisted of Irwin Sandler, Chair, and (in alphabetical order) David Balk, John Jordan, Cara Kennedy, Janice Nadeau, and Ester Shapiro. The manuscript is a revision of a report developed for the Center for the Advancement of Health, which provided support for the development of the project. Special appreciation is expressed to Tracy Kolian and Janice Genevro who managed the development of the report for the Center for the Advancement of Health.

Notes

Irwin Sandler and Cara Kennedy, Prevention Research Center, Department of Psychology, Arizona State University; David Balk, Brooklyn College; John Jordan, Family Loss Project; Janice Nadeau, Minnesota Human Development Consultants; and Ester Shapiro, University of Massachusetts, Boston.

¹A report of these round table discussions can be found at www.cfah.org.

²To obtain a copy of this information, contact Dr. Shapiro via E-mail at [email protected].

^a For practitioners, this item asked how helpful they perceived each source of information to be (from 1 = very helpful to 4 = not at all helpful); for researchers this item asked how successful they perceived themselves to be in communicating their findings to practitioners in each source of information (from 1 = very successful to 4 = not at all successful). The rank scores were created from the mean of the ratings reported.

^b For practitioners, this item asked whether or not they used each source of information in the past year to learn about any bereavement issue; for researchers this item asked whether or not they used each source of information to communicate the findings from their research to bereavement service providers.

^c An examination of the descriptions that characterize “other” revealed that practitioners are also learning about bereavement issues from their clients, from work in other practice settings, and from being engaged in preparing workshops and video materials. Researchers report that they communicate their research in other sources such as written reports to funding sources, non-professional publications, and individual therapy and support groups.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

BRIDGING WORK GROUP Irwin Sandler and Cara Kennedy, Prevention Research Center, Department of Psychology, Arizona State University; David Balk, Brooklyn College; John Jordan, Family Loss Project; Janice Nadeau, Minnesota Human Development Consultants; and Ester Shapiro, University of Massachusetts, Boston.