Relationship breakups are an almost universal experience, yet they remain one of life's most challenging emotional trials. When a romantic relationship ends, individuals often experience emotions ranging from sadness and grief to anger and even relief. The psychology literature provides deep insights into the varied and intricate emotional, cognitive, and physiological responses experienced during and after a breakup.

Breakups often initiate a grief process similar to that experienced after the death of a loved one. According to Kubler-Ross (1969), individuals can progress through five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Although this model was initially developed to describe the process of dealing with terminal illness and death, subsequent researchers found parallels in the emotional aftermath of a romantic relationship's end (Field et al., 2009).

One of the most debilitating outcomes of a breakup is its threat to one's self-concept. A relationship often leads to intertwined identities, where one's self-worth and self-definition become deeply connected with the partner (Slotter et al., 2010). When the relationship ends, this interwoven self-concept gets disrupted, reducing clarity and further intensifying emotional distress (Lewandowski et al., 2006).

Physiologically, breakups can activate the same brain regions associated with physical pain, emphasizing the powerful emotional toll of relationship dissolution (Kross et al., 2011). Additionally, individuals may experience withdrawal symptoms akin to drug withdrawal due to decreased levels of the love-related neurotransmitter oxytocin (Fisher et al., 2010).

Despite the emotional challenges of a breakup, the experience can also serve as an opportunity for personal growth and self-discovery. Research indicates that individuals can develop increased resilience, self-insight, and even clarity about future relationship desires and needs post-breakup (Tashiro & Frazier, 2003).

The end of a romantic relationship is an intricate phenomenon characterized by a range of emotional, cognitive, and physiological responses. While challenging, with adequate support and introspection, individuals can navigate this tumultuous period, eventually becoming more robust and self-aware.

Mapping Kübler-Ross's Grief Stages to Relationship Breakups

Understanding the emotional aftermath of relationship breakups can be framed within the context of the grief process. The five stages of grief, as conceptualized by Kübler-Ross (1969), initially provided insight into the emotional journey of terminally ill patients. Still, its relevance extends to many loss experiences, including the dissolution of romantic relationships. A breakup often symbolizes not just the end of a relationship but the loss of shared dreams, memories, and a vision of the future. By mapping these grief stages into relationship breakups, we can gain deeper insights into the emotional complexities involved.

The first stage, Denial, is marked by an inability or unwillingness to accept the reality of the situation. For individuals navigating a breakup, this might manifest as shock, disbelief, or even a conviction that the relationship will soon be restored (Tashiro & Frazier, 2003). Denial is a psychological cushion against the impending emotional turbulence, offering a reprieve from the pain.

Moving on to Anger, this phase represents a tumultuous concoction of emotions. Post-breakup, this anger can be directed towards the ex-partner, blaming them for the perceived injustices. However, it can also be introspective, with individuals questioning their roles and actions within the relationship's decline (Field et al., 2009). This anger, as Bonanno and Kaltman (1999) suggest, may act as a mechanism to offset the helplessness and regain a sense of control.

The Bargaining stage is characterized by attempts to negotiate or find temporary solutions. This might involve an individual pleading with their ex-partner for another chance or mentally replaying scenarios where things could have gone differently. It is a desperate bid to regain what has been lost, perhaps driven by the innate human desire for relational connectedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995).

With Depression, the gravity of the loss truly sinks in. Here, emotions shift from the frenetic energy of bargaining to the profound sadness and loneliness that characterizes depressive states. According to Monroe, Rohde, Seeley, and Lewinsohn (1999), such intense emotional experiences are not just about the lost relationship but also a reflection of diminished self-worth and shattered personal expectations.

Finally, in the Acceptance stage, there is a slow and often painful realization of the new status quo. It is not about celebrating the breakup but recognizing its inevitability and the need to move forward. As posited by Kubler-Ross & Kessler (2005), acceptance is about finding a way to live in a world without the loved one, or in this case, the loved relationship. Here, individuals often begin the process of rediscovering themselves, establishing new routines, and opening up to the possibility of new relationships or experiences.

In conclusion, Kübler-Ross's grief stages offer a lens to understand the emotional rollercoaster of relationship breakups. While the journey is deeply personal and non-linear, acknowledging and understanding these stages can offer solace and direction to those navigating the complexities of relationship dissolution.

Understanding the Act of "Letting Go" in Psychological Theories

Central to human experience is the need to navigate the intricate maze of emotions, especially when faced with adversity, loss, or change. Several psychological theories have addressed the concept of "letting go" through varied lenses, each adding a dimension to our understanding.

The foundational Attachment Theory formulated by John Bowlby (1980) posits that our early relationships with primary caregivers sculpt our adult interpersonal interactions. As these attachment styles influence our romantic engagements, they invariably shape our response to their endings. A secure attachment style, characterized by a deep-rooted sense of worth and trust in others, fosters resilience in relationship terminations. On the other hand, those with anxious or avoidant attachments might grapple with the turmoil of letting go. In their seminal research, Fraley and Shaver (1999) underscored that individuals exhibiting secure attachments were more adept at deploying effective coping mechanisms post-breakup, significantly aiding their healing journey.

Venturing into the realm of emotions, the Emotion Regulation Theory, primarily influenced by Gross (1998), highlights our capacity to modulate our emotional responses. Central to letting go is the act of cognitive change, where one reconfigures the emotional value of an event. Troy, Shallcross, and Mauss (2013) conducted insightful research into this domain, revealing that individuals adept at using cognitive reappraisal strategies, such as reinterpreting emotional events, exhibited superior coping capacities following romantic breakups.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) offers a fresh perspective. Developed by Hayes, Strosahl, and Wilson (1999), ACT accentuates psychological flexibility. This therapeutic approach encourages acknowledging rather than eluding negative emotions, creating an environment conducive to letting go. Kashdan and Rottenberg's (2010) research corroborates the virtues of psychological flexibility, suggesting that such individuals exhibit reduced negative emotional episodes and improved overall well-being.

Lastly, the concept of Radical Acceptance emerging from Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) by Linehan (1993) is pivotal. This therapy emphasizes the unequivocal and non-judgmental acknowledgment of reality, facilitating the effective processing of emotional distress. The merits of this approach are evident in research by Perseius et al. (2003), where patients exposed to DBT principles, including radical acceptance, showcased significant reductions in self-harming tendencies and heightened emotional regulation.

The delicate dance of "letting go" is comprehensively addressed across diverse psychological frameworks. Each theory, backed by empirical research, illuminates the multifaceted journey of healing, acceptance, and growth. Recognizing these insights can significantly empower individuals traversing the challenging terrains of emotional distress.

Mapping the Transtheoretical Model of Change to Relationship Breakups

The Transtheoretical Model of change, proposed by Prochaska and DiClemente (1983), breaks down the change process into five key stages: pre-contemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, and Maintenance. Although the model was primarily developed to understand health-related behaviors (e.g., smoking cessation), its concepts can be applied to understand the process of emotional and behavioral changes people undergo following a relationship breakup.

1. Precontemplation (Not Ready): In the context of a relationship, individuals at this stage may be unaware of or in denial about the problems in their relationship. They might not recognize the need for change or be oblivious to the signs indicating a relationship's decline. Even if friends or family observe and point out issues, the person might dismiss or minimize them. The emotional attachment and fear of loneliness can make one overlook evident incompatibilities or dysfunctions (Rusbult et al., 2001).
2. Contemplation (Getting Ready): Here, individuals start acknowledging the problems. They might weigh the pros and cons of staying in the relationship versus ending it. This stage often involves emotional turmoil as individuals grapple with the realization that their relationship might not be salvageable. While they have not committed to action yet, they are more aware of a breakup's emotional and practical implications (Knobloch & Solomon, 1999).
3. Preparation (Ready): At this juncture, individuals are mentally preparing to end the relationship. They might seek counseling, talk to friends and family, or make preliminary plans for life post-breakup (like considering where to live). Some might initiate conversations about their feelings with their partner or suggest a trial separation.
4. Action: This is the stage where individuals take definitive steps to end the relationship. They might communicate their decision to their partner, move out, or seek legal counsel for formal separations like divorce. During this period, the emphasis is on coping strategies to handle the emotional aftermath, as breakups are associated with increased stress and risk of depression (Monroe et al., 1999).
5. Maintenance: Post-breakup, individuals rebuild their lives and ensure they do not fall back into unhealthy relationship patterns. This stage might involve attending therapy, rebuilding one's self-concept (Slotter et al., 2010), and establishing a new normal. Relapse, in this context, could be understood as re-engaging with the ex-partner or falling into another similar unhealthy relationship pattern.

The Transtheoretical Model provides a lens through which we can conceptualize the emotional and behavioral shifts individuals undergo when navigating the complexities of ending a romantic relationship.

Other Models of Change

The realm of psychology has many models that describe the process of change, especially when considering behavioral, cognitive, and emotional transformations. Several others deserve mention alongside the Transtheoretical Model and Kübler-Ross's grief stage model.

The Cognitive-Behavioral Model is pivotal when discussing change. This model, rooted in the works of Beck (1976), emphasizes the interplay between thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Change is perceived as a shift in one's cognitive schema or restructuring maladaptive thought patterns, leading to alterations in feelings and behaviors. It is a model heavily employed in therapeutic settings, especially when addressing depression and anxiety.

After a breakup, individuals may grapple with maladaptive thoughts about themselves, their ex-partner, and their relationships. They might think, "I'm unlovable," "All relationships end in pain," or "I'll never find someone else." The cognitive-behavioral model, emphasizing the interrelationship between thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, suggests that challenging and restructuring these negative cognitions can alleviate emotional distress and adopt healthier behaviors. For instance, through cognitive restructuring, someone might replace "I'm unlovable" with "This relationship wasn't right for me, but I have qualities that make me worthy of love."

The Health Belief Model (HBM), initially conceptualized by Rosenstock in the 1950s, offers insights into why individuals adopt health-promoting behaviors. This model posits that individuals are more likely to make positive changes if they perceive a threat to their health, believe that a particular health measure will effectively mitigate that threat, and are motivated to make the change.

While primarily used in health contexts, the HBM can be analogously applied to relationship breakups. An individual might perceive the emotional pain following a breakup as a significant threat to their mental well-being. Suppose they believe that seeking therapy or joining a support group (the health measure) would alleviate their distress and are motivated to move on. In that case, they will likely adopt such behaviors to promote healing.

The Theory of Planned Behavior, developed by Icek Ajzen (1991), suggests that human action is guided by three kinds of considerations: behavioral beliefs, normative beliefs, and control beliefs. This theory is instrumental in predicting and understanding behavioral changes, especially in response to interventions.

After a breakup, an individual's decision to adopt certain behaviors—like seeking therapy, avoiding contact with the ex, or engaging in self-improvement activities—can be explained by this model. Their behavioral beliefs (e.g., "Therapy will help me process the breakup"), normative beliefs (e.g., "My friends think I should take some time for self-reflection"), and control beliefs (e.g., "I have the resources and time to attend therapy") will influence their intention and subsequent action.

Social Cognitive Theory, propounded by Albert Bandura (1986), is rooted in the understanding that learning occurs in a social context. Here, change is framed through the lens of observational learning, where individuals adapt and modify behaviors based on observed outcomes. Self-efficacy, or the belief in one's capability to achieve a set outcome, plays a significant role in this model, influencing the likelihood of committing to and achieving change.

This theory focuses on learning through observation and the role of self-efficacy. In the context of a breakup, individuals might observe others—friends, family, or even celebrities—manage their breakups and emulate observed positive coping strategies. For instance, if a person sees a friend benefit from journaling post-breakup, they might adopt this strategy. Moreover, their belief in their ability to move past the breakup (self-efficacy) plays a pivotal role. High self-efficacy could lead to proactive behaviors like seeking new hobbies or building new social connections, believing these actions will help healing.

In summary, the multifaceted nature of change is thoroughly explored in psychology through various models. Each provides a distinct lens to appreciate the intricacies of human adaptation, growth, and transformation, whether in response to external stimuli, intrinsic motivations, or learned experiences.

Resistance to Change, Grief, and Moving On

The journey through and beyond relationship breakups, punctuated by resistance to change and profound grief, is undeniably complex. However, the silver lining lies in the transformative power of overcoming these hurdles, leading to personal growth, resilience, and renewed emotional strength.

Overcoming resistance and processing grief have profound implications for personal development. A study by Tashiro and Frazier (2003) found that many college students who experienced a breakup reported positive growth, such as improved personal well-being, an enhanced understanding, and better knowledge about future relationship desires. This growth often arises from confronting and navigating the challenges of change and loss.

Furthermore, Bonanno and Kaltman (2001) explored the diverse paths people take in the face of loss and trauma. They identified that those who exhibited resilience, defined as a stable trajectory of healthy functioning, often successfully navigated grief and adversity without enduring the prolonged distress that might inhibit moving on. This resilience was often associated with positive emotion and laughter, suggesting that finding moments of joy amidst sorrow can be healing.

The concept of "posttraumatic growth" provides another valuable perspective. Tedeschi and Calhoun (2004) noted that individuals who face traumatic events, including the end of significant relationships, can experience positive changes in their lives as a direct result. This might manifest as a newfound appreciation for life, recognition of new possibilities, enhanced personal strength, improved relationships, or spiritual development.

In sum, while resistance to change and the throes of grief following a breakup are arduous, they also offer a crucible for growth. Psychological research underscores the idea that confronting and surmounting these emotional barriers can pave the way for profound personal transformation, equipping individuals with the tools and insights to move forward with renewed vigor and clarity.

The Latest Psychological Research

Grief, conventionally associated with death and loss, is also a significant aspect of the emotional landscape following relationship breakups. The emotional intensity and the multifaceted nature of grief after the end of a romantic relationship have spurred research into its dynamics and implications.

The Spectrum of Grief: Relationship breakups can instigate feelings synonymous with bereavement. Field et al. (2009) illustrated that individuals display symptoms reminiscent of grief after a breakup, such as shock, protest, disorganization, and reorganization. The process is complex and nonlinear, suggesting that individuals oscillate between different stages or feelings before reaching acceptance.

Neurobiology of Grief in Breakups: Recent neuroimaging research has underscored that a breakup's emotional pain activates brain regions associated with physical pain, specifically the anterior cingulate cortex and the insula (Kross et al., 2011). This provides a neurobiological basis for the palpable anguish people often describe after a romantic split.

Growth and Resilience Post-Breakup: An interesting dimension emerging from breakup research is the concept of posttraumatic growth. While undergoing grief, individuals often report increased self-awareness, personal growth, and a clearer sense of their relationship desires over time (Tashiro & Frazier, 2003). The very act of navigating grief can catalyze meaningful personal transformation.

Social Media's Influence: The digital age has added layers of complexity to the grieving process post-breakup. Continued online exposure to an ex-partner through platforms like Facebook can intensify emotional pain and prolong grief (Marshall, 2012). This digital entanglement can sometimes impede the natural grieving process, making detachment and healing more challenging.

The Role of Coping Strategies: Active coping mechanisms, such as seeking therapy, journaling, or leaning on social support, are instrumental in mediating the grieving process. Conversely, passive strategies like ruminating or avoiding can exacerbate grief and delay emotional recovery (Mason et al., 2012).

While grief post-breakup is a deeply personal and often tumultuous journey, psychology research has highlighted its universality, underlying neurobiological foundations, and potential pathways toward healing and growth.

The Perils of Being Stuck

Working through a relationship breakup is a deeply personal and often non-linear process, with individuals facing various emotional, cognitive, and practical challenges. There are common areas where many individuals tend to get stuck during the post-breakup journey:

• Idealization of the Past: Some individuals focus only on the positive aspects of the relationship and their ex-partner. This idealization can lead to feelings of regret, making it difficult to move forward. It can also hinder the ability to recognize the legitimate reasons the relationship ended.
• Rumination: Obsessively replaying events, conversations, or perceived mistakes can trap individuals in a cycle of overthinking. This rumination can intensify guilt, regret, and sadness, making it challenging to achieve emotional closure.
• Denial: Some may find it hard to accept the end of the relationship, hoping for reconciliation even when it might not be in their best interest. Denial can stall the grieving process and prevent acceptance of the new reality.
• Social Media and Digital Entanglement: In the modern digital age, continuous online exposure to an ex-partner's life can hinder healing. Watching an ex-partner move on or be reminded of them can reignite pain and slow healing.
• Loneliness and Isolation: Individuals often feel a void after a breakup, especially from a long-term relationship. This loneliness can lead to social withdrawal, further exacerbating feelings of isolation and sadness.
• Fear of Being Alone: This fear can sometimes lead individuals to rush into new relationships without fully processing the breakup or understanding what they want in a partner, potentially setting the stage for future relationship difficulties.
• Self-Worth Issues: Breakups can trigger feelings of inadequacy or doubts about one's self-worth. Some may internalize the breakup as a reflection of their shortcomings, leading to diminished self-esteem.
• Guilt and Responsibility: If one feels that they were the primary cause of the breakup, or if they initiated it, they might grapple with guilt and responsibility, making it hard to move on.
• Avoidance: Some individuals might avoid processing the breakup by immersing themselves in work, hobbies, or new relationships. While distractions can be beneficial in moderation, avoidance can delay genuine emotional processing.
• Loss of Shared Identity: Partners often develop a shared identity in long-term relationships. Post-breakup, individuals might struggle to rediscover their identity, passions, and life direction.

It is essential to understand that getting "stuck" is a natural part of the grieving process for many. Recognizing these pitfalls, seeking support (whether through friends, family, or professional therapy), and giving oneself time to heal can be instrumental in navigating the complexities of a breakup.

The Role of Psychotherapy in Getting Unstuck

Psychotherapy can play a pivotal role in aiding individuals as they navigate the tumultuous waters of a relationship breakup. Here is how psychotherapy can provide support and guidance during this challenging time:

• Safe Space for Emotional Expression: Therapy offers a confidential, non-judgmental environment where individuals can openly express their feelings. This externalization can be cathartic and essential for emotional processing.
• Cognitive Reframing: Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques can help individuals identify and challenge unhelpful thoughts or beliefs stemming from the breakup. This might include catastrophizing, over-generalizing, or idealizing the past relationship.
• Grief Processing: A breakup often instigates a grieving process. Therapists can help clients understand and navigate the stages of grief, ensuring they do not get stuck and guiding them toward acceptance.
• Self-worth and Identity Work: The end of a relationship can shake one's self-esteem and sense of identity. Therapists can support individuals in reconnecting with their self-worth and redefining their identity outside of the relationship context.
• Developing Coping Strategies: Through therapeutic techniques, individuals can learn and practice effective coping mechanisms, whether relaxation techniques, mindfulness practices, or problem-solving skills.
• Setting Boundaries: Especially in cases where continued interaction with the ex-partner is inevitable (shared custody, working together, mutual friends), therapists can aid in setting and maintaining healthy boundaries.
• Understanding Patterns: Therapy can illuminate recurring patterns in relationships. Recognizing these can prevent individuals from repeating the same patterns in future relationships.
• Addressing Ancillary Issues: Sometimes, the stress of a breakup can exacerbate pre-existing mental health concerns, such as depression, anxiety, or substance use. A therapist can identify and address these issues concurrently.
• Guidance in Moving On: Therapists can help individuals discern when they are ready to move on, offering guidance on how to approach new relationships in a healthy manner and ensuring past relationship baggage does not unduly influence new connections.
• Social Connection: Feeling isolated or alone is common after a breakup. Therapists can encourage clients to reconnect socially, suggesting support groups or activities that can foster new connections and reduce feelings of loneliness.
• Promotion of Self-care: Emotional healing is bolstered by physical well-being. Therapists can emphasize the importance of self-care, which includes sleep, nutrition, physical activity, and relaxation.

It is essential to recognize that while therapy offers numerous tools and insights, the healing process is inherently individual. The duration and approach can vary widely based on personal needs, the nature of the breakup, and pre-existing mental health conditions. Still, with professional guidance, many find the journey toward healing and growth more navigable.

Summary

The emotional aftermath of a relationship breakup can often resemble a maze, where navigating through feelings of grief, loss, and identity reshaping feels overwhelming and convoluted. Psychological models, such as the Transtheoretical model and Kübler-Ross's grief stage model, provide frameworks that capture this recovery journey's non-linear and multifaceted nature. Just as these models illuminate the pain points, they highlight the transformative potential inherent in personal upheavals. As recent psychology research underscores, individuals can experience profound neurobiological and emotional shifts following breakups, sometimes mirroring the anguish of physical pain.

Amidst this chaos, the human spirit's resilience shines brightly. With tools like psychotherapy, individuals can reframe their narratives, identify and break patterns, and embrace renewed self-worth and identity. In the shadow of heartbreak, opportunities for self-discovery and growth emerge, reinforcing the age-old belief that every end can usher in a new beginning. The journey might be fraught with challenges, but with introspection, support, and time, healing and evolution are not only possible but inevitable.

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. Meridian.

Bonanno, G. A., & Kaltman, S. (2001). The varieties of grief experience. Clinical Psychology Review, 21(5), 705-734.

Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Loss, sadness and depression (Vol. 3). Basic Books.

Field, T., Diego, M., & Sanders, C. (2009). Adolescents' parent and peer relationships. Adolescence, 44(173), 173-188.

Field, T., Diego, M., Pelaez, M., Deeds, O., & Delgado, J. (2009). Breakup distress in university students. Adolescence, 44(176), 705-727.

Fisher, H. E., Brown, L. L., Aron, A., Strong, G., & Mashek, D. (2010). Reward, addiction, and emotion regulation systems associated with rejection in love. Journal of Neurophysiology, 104(1), 51-60.

Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (1999). Loss and bereavement: Attachment theory and recent controversies concerning “grief work” and the nature of detachment. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 735-759). Guilford Press.

Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271-299.

Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: An experiential approach to behavior change. Guilford Press.

Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(7), 865-878.

Knobloch, L. K., & Solomon, D. H. (1999). Measuring the sources and content of relational uncertainty. Communication Studies, 50(4), 261-278.

Kross, E., Berman, M. G., Mischel, W., Smith, E. E., & Wager, T. D. (2011). Social rejection shares somatosensory representations with physical pain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(15), 6270-6275.

Kübler-Ross, E. (1969). On death and dying. Macmillan.

Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. (2005). On grief and grieving: Finding the meaning of grief through the five stages of loss. Simon and Schuster.

Lewandowski, G., Aron, A., Bassis, S., & Kunak, J. (2006). Losing a self-expanding relationship: Implications for the self-concept. Personal Relationships, 13(3), 317-331.

Linehan, M. M. (1993). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder. Guilford Press.

Marshall, T. C. (2012). Facebook surveillance of former romantic partners: associations with postbreakup recovery and personal growth. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(10), 521-526.

Marshall, T. C. (2012). Facebook surveillance of former romantic partners: associations with postbreakup recovery and personal growth. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(10), 521-526.

Mason, A. E., Law, R. W., Bryan, A. E., Portley, R. M., & Sbarra, D. A. (2012). Facing a breakup: Electromyographic responses moderate self-concept recovery following a romantic separation. Personal Relationships, 19(3), 551-568.

Monroe, S. M., Rohde, P., Seeley, J. R., & Lewinsohn, P. M. (1999). Life events and depression in adolescence: Relationship loss as a prospective risk factor for first onset of major depressive disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108(4), 606-614.

Perseius, K. I., Öjehagen, A., Ekdahl, S., Åsberg, M., & Samuelsson, M. (2003). Treatment of suicidal and deliberate self‐harming patients with borderline personality disorder using dialectical behavioral therapy: The patients' and the therapists' perceptions. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 17(5), 218-227.

Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(3), 390–395.

Rosenstock, I. M. (1974). The health belief model and preventive health behavior. Health Education Monographs, 2(4), 354-386.

Rusbult, C. E., Olsen, N., Davis, J. L., & Hannon, P. A. (2001). Commitment and relationship maintenance mechanisms. In J. Harvey & A. Wenzel (Eds.), Close romantic relationships: Maintenance and enhancement (pp. 87-113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Slotter, E. B., Gardner, W. L., & Finkel, E. J. (2010). Who am I without you? The influence of romantic breakup on the self-concept. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(2), 147-160.

Slotter, E. B., Gardner, W. L., & Finkel, E. J. (2010). Who am I without you? The influence of romantic breakup on the self-concept. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(2), 147-160.

Tashiro, T., & Frazier, P. (2003). "I’ll never be in a relationship like that again": Personal growth following romantic relationship breakups. Personal Relationships, 10(1), 113-128.

Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (2004). Posttraumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and empirical evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1-18.

Troy, A. S., Shallcross, A. J., & Mauss, I. B. (2013). A person-by-situation approach to emotion regulation: Cognitive reappraisal can either help or hurt, depending on the context. Psychological Science, 24(12), 2505-2514.