“Passing Away – Passing By”
A Qualitative Study of Experiences and Meaning Making of
Post Death Presence
Anne Austad
2014
Thesis submitted to MF Norwegian School of Theology
for the degree of PhD
Acknowledgements
It is sometimes said that academia is a culture of competition and protectionism in which one has to
guard one’s own ideas. I have found a culture of sharing. Throughout my PhD, I have been
surrounded by people who have given me interesting thoughts, new ideas, time and support. Now I
want to take the opportunity to thank those who have shared with me, and in doing so, have
contributed to this PhD thesis.
First, I would like to thank the 16 participants who allowed me to interview them. I am deeply
grateful to each one who willingly gave up time to take part. By generously telling their personal,
vulnerable, dramatic, and sometimes even funny stories of life and death, these interviewees have
given me a fascinating material. They have also given me insights that will stay with me for the rest
of my life.
Second, many thanks go to my supervisor, Geir Afdal, and my co-supervisor Leif Gunnar Engedal.
This thesis would definitely not have been accomplished without their careful readings and
constructive comments. Nor would the process have been half as fun. As both Geir and Leif Gunnar
possess the invaluable gift of making one feel positive, even after submitting far less than brilliant
drafts, I always went out of the door encouraged to keep on working. The combination of the two
professors’ different professional competence gave me the best supervision I could have wished for.
I have also been lucky to receive valuable comments from my supervisors in settings other than oneto-one conversations. Because he holds an important position in the doctoral program at MF, Geir has
led several PhD courses in which I have benefitted from his teaching and feedback. I should also
mention Geir’s group supervision with all his doctoral students. Those half-yearly “Afdal seminars”
provided constructive comments and good laughs. Thanks again to Geir, and to my fellow PhD
students who took part: Trine, Oddgeir, Ole, Morten, Marianne, Ingrid, Fredrik, Øivind, Hilde, Gina,
Frida, and Elisabeth.
The psychology of religion PhD group, with its monthly meetings, has been a good place to receive
comments on drafts. Led by Lars Johan Danbolt who always gives valuable comments and creates a
warm and easy atmosphere, this group has been important. I am grateful to Lars Johan and to Torgeir,
Tor, Hege, Annhild, Sigrid Helene, Liv, Kirsten—and all the others who have been part of the group.
A special thanks to Hege, Annhild and Sigrid Helene for their collaboration on writing papers, for
interesting discussions in our little study group, and for all the good fellowship in travelling to
1
psychology of religion conferences. As well as presenting drafts and papers, the psychology of
religion group arranged seminars at which my supervisor Leif Gunnar gave excellent and inspiring
lectures. These seminars really brought me forward.
The research school, Religion, Values and Society, a joint venture between different institutions, has
arranged several interesting interdisciplinary seminars. Thanks to Jan-Olav Henriksen for initiating
the RVS and for comments on early drafts. Thanks also to all participants and teachers at three
unforgettable summer courses on Lesbos providing weeks of intensive learning—in the classroom, at
the table and on the beach.
On a study trip to England I met Jacqueline and Edith, two PhDs who had just finished their theses on
a similar subject to mine. I am very glad we were able to meet and talk about all those very narrow
things related to our common focus of study. I have benefitted from using their publications in my
thesis.
I would like to thank PhD coordinator Nils Aksel Røseg at MF, who not only kept track of the
progress of my work, but also warmly wished me well and offered encouraging comments along the
way.
At my workplace, Diakonhjemmet University College, I have been lucky to share a corridor and lunch
table with a fantastic bunch of fellow PhD students. This has been the place for sharing both
important and trivial matters in our private and professional life. Thanks to the “old” group—
Elisabeth, Inger, Magdalene, Hilde, Anne-Margrethe—and to the newer students Gyrid, Åse and
Grete. The leader of Diakonhjemmet PhD program, Randi Skår, has been invaluable through her
warmth and concern about our—and my—writing process, a process that intertwines with life and thus
is seldom straightforward. Thanks also to May-Britt Krogsvold, who is in charge of all the practical
and economic matters related to the PhD project and who always answers questions promptly. I must
also give a special mention to Hans Stifoss-Hanssen, who has been part of the corridor fellowship,
sharing food recipes, political opinions and PhD issues with all the students, as well as reading and
commenting on early drafts of my thesis, and being an inspiring person to collaborate with.
I am further grateful to Kari Jordheim and Annette Leis Peters at the Institute for Diaconia and
Leadership. Kari and Annette have expertly facilitated the 20% pedagogical part of my post and at the
same time encouraged me to carry on with the thesis. I am looking forward to starting work again
with those two warm leaders, and with my good colleagues at the Diaconia program; Kari, Hans
Morten and Stephanie. Thanks also to my students who always teach me a great deal.
Throughout the process of writing this thesis, I have been lucky to make two very special PhDfriends. They truly have a large share in making this process as good as it has been. A warm thanks to
2
Hilde and Marianne for being my close companions. Thanks for all the inspiring and open
conversations, for sharing ups and downs, popping into my office or sending supportive text messages.
Thanks also to Elisabeth, who joined us at our special dinners, which I know we will continue to have.
Because I was researching and writing about a topic that is familiar from the news media as well as
quite prevalent in society generally, I have had many interesting conversations with a wide variety of
people. I can honestly say that I haven’t been to any party, mothers’ meeting, or seminar without
meeting at least one person who disclosed or knew of an experience of contact with a deceased person.
I could have recruited all the participants from my local area if I had wanted to. These informal
conversations, together with more formal seminars for pastors and deacons where I presented my
research, have been important in providing me with new ideas.
I want to thank all my friends and family who have been so engaged in my project, and have cheered
me on. In particular I want to mention Asbjørn, who has followed this work closely, Geir Anders,
who has contributed valuable advice on how to make a long and potentially boring monograph more
reader-friendly, Silje, who helped with the last draft of the English translation of the interview
material, and Anne Kristin who provided the idea to the title. Great and special thanks to my mother
and father for believing that I would make this through, for acting as taxi-drivers countless times to
take my children to dancing and taekwondo classes, and for helping out with practical matters.
Last, but not least, thousands of warm thanks go to my closest family: Tommy, Maria, Sara and
Daniel. You have remained close to me all the way through and have been my greatest support group.
From you I have gained strength and balance to carry on. Thanks for generously letting me work
during this last summer holiday and at weekends over the past year. But more important than that,
thank you for being you and for showing me every day that my relationship with you is much more
important than writing a good thesis. Spending years writing about continuing bonds should remind
me that our closest bonds are strong, but they also need to be taken care of. So: Now it is time to
finish writing, and to spend more time with those who matters most to me.
Oslo, August 2014
3
4
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
PART I: COMPOSING THE STUDY
1.
11
INTRODUCTORY COMPOSITION
1.1. Background
1.1.1. Motivational background
1.1.2. Contextual background
1.2. Foreground
1.2.1. The phenomenon of post death contact
1.2.2. From post death contact to post death presence
1.3. Focus
1.3.1. Development of research questions
1.3.2. Clarification of concepts
1.3.3. Secondary research questions
1.3.4. Clarification of concepts
1.3.5. Unit of analysis
1.4. Design
1.5. Frame
1.5.1. Academically placement: Psychology of religion
1.5.2. Hermeneutical psychology of religion
1.5.3. Hermeneutical psychology of religion, clinical psychology and psychopathology
1.6. Composition of the thesis
11
13
14
18
18
19
21
21
22
26
28
33
34
38
38
38
40
42
2.
PREVIOUS RESEARCH – LACUNAS AND BUILDING BLOCKS
2.1. Research on post death presence within the social science and humanities
2.1.1. Seminal studies of the prevalence and correlates
2.1.2. Sociological and anthropological studies
2.1.3. Religious and cultural studies
2.1.4. Studies in theology and spirituality
2.2. Research on post death presence within psychology and psychiatry
2.2.1. Studies in general psychology and parapsychology
2.2.2. Studies within a psychiatric context
2.3. Bereavement research and post death presence
2.3.1. Quantitative adjustment to bereavement studies
2.3.2. Differentiation of continuing bonds in adjustment
2.3.3. Meaning making in bereavement
2.3.4. Qualitative studies on the post death presence experience
43
44
44
46
47
50
52
52
54
55
55
57
58
60
3.
THEORETICAL COMPOSITION
3.1. Dialogical Self Theory
3.1.1. The development of Dialogical Self Theory
3.1.2. Inspirational ideas: James, Mead and Bhaktin
3.1.3. Other influences
3.1.4. Main features of the self
3.1.5. Positions, voices and movement in space
3.1.6. Spatiality between internal and external domains
3.1.7. Valuation
65
66
66
67
69
70
74
77
79
5
4.
3.1.8. Dialogical Self Theory as conceptual framework for studying PDP
3.2. Continuing Bonds Theory
3.2.1. Introduction to Continuing Bonds Theory
3.2.2. The grief work paradigm and the continuing bonds paradigm
3.2.3. Continuing bonds and the goal of grief
3.2.4. Continuing bonds and the process of grief
3.2.5. The nature of the bonds
3.2.6. Continuing bonds and worldview
3.2.7. Continuing Bonds Theory as a conceptual framework for studying PDP
3.3. Closing remarks
81
82
82
83
86
87
89
93
94
95
METHODICAL COMPOSITION AND METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
4.1. Research paradigm and research strategy
4.1.1. Introduction to IPA as a research strategy
4.1.2. The study in relation to traditional IPA research
4.2. Sampling
4.2.1. Sampling strategies
4.2.2. Development of inclusion criteria
4.2.3. Recruiting participants
4.2.4. Sampling quality
4.3. Interviewing
4.3.1. Semi-structured interviews
4.3.2. Interview agenda
4.3.3. Conducting the interviews
4.3.4. Tape recording and transcription
4.3.5. Sending back the interviews
4.3.6. Interviews as co-construction
4.4. Analyzing the material
4.4.1. IPA as analytic strategy
4.4.2. The initial phase
4.4.3. The systematic phase
4.4.4. The use of theories
4.5. Quality criteria
4.6. Personal reflexivity
4.7. Ethical reflections
4.7.1. Informed consent
4.7.2. Anonymity
4.7.3. Risk of harm
4.8. Closing remarks
97
97
97
101
103
103
104
107
109
110
110
110
112
113
114
115
116
116
116
117
119
120
123
125
125
126
127
128
PART II: ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
131
5.
PERCEIVERS OF POST DEATH PRESENCE
5.1. Presentation of the participants
5.2. Overview of the participants
133
133
140
6.
PERCEPTIONS OF POST DEATH PRESENCE
6.1. Perceptual quality and content of PDP
141
141
6
6.1.1.
6.1.2.
7.
Overview of perceptual modalities
“It’s not a thought which is coming, but a voice, his voice”
Auditory perceptions of PDP
6.1.3. “I see something physical, but it is not exactly the same as when they were alive”
Visual perceptions of PDP
6.1.4. “Suddenly I felt a warm hand around my hand”
Tactile perceptions of PDP
6.1.5. “It was just like honey in the whole room”
Olfactory perceptions of PDP
6.1.6.
“I saw him clearly and he said..”
Combination of modes of sensory PDP perceptions
6.1.7. “I feel the presence in my body, but not the way like he touches me”
Sense of presence
6.1.8. “For there are degrees as well”
A continuum of vividness of PDP experiences
6.1.9. “The burglar alarm is living its own life after he died”
Signs of presence
6.1.10. Summary and reflections
6.2. Time
6.2.1. “I have had regular contact with him for twenty five years”
Time span and frequency
6.2.2. “She can appear at the most bizarre moments”
Spontaneity of the PDP experience
6.2.3. Summary and reflections
6.3. Space
6.3.1. “She is not in the bathroom, not at the toilet and not in the bedroom”
Physical space of the PDP perceptions
6.3.2. “Outside” and “inside” the head
Perceptual space of PDP
6.3.3. “It’s nothing geographical, that’s the whole point”
Metaphysical space
6.3.4. Summary and reflections
6.4. Summary and findings
142
144
MEANING MAKING OF POST DEATH PRESENCE
7.1. Voices in sense making
7.1.1. “He is so attached to me”
Biographical and relational interpretations
7.1.2. “A connection in my head and heart”
Psychological interpretations
7.1.3. “In another dimension with the ability to cross the border”
Spiritual and religious interpretations
7.1.4. “I will not exclude energies and forces communicating across borders”
Parapsychological interpretations
7.1.5. “There has been one in each generation having this”
Genetic interpretations
7.1.6. “This is still not acceptable to talk about”
Opposing voices in sense making
7.1.7. “Because that lady couldn’t know all that she suddenly told me that she saw”
Mediums as interpretive resources
185
186
186
148
151
153
154
155
157
161
165
167
167
169
173
175
175
177
179
181
183
189
190
191
193
194
199
7
8.
9.
7.1.8. Summary and reflections
7.2. Valuation of significance
7.2.1. “I don’t know how life had been if he hadn’t been there”
Positive valuations
7.2.2. “It made me fearful, but it gave me confidence”
Some ambivalent valuations
7.2.3. “I didn’t experience it as positive, but as scary”
One negative valuation
7.2.4. “This is not grandparents who watch over you”
Valuations of PDP compared to related experiences
7.2.5. Summary and reflections
7.3. Summary and findings
201
202
202
POST DEATH PRESENCE AND GRIEF
8.1. Experiencing PDP through voices of grief
8.1.1. “It may be due to a delayed grief-reaction”
Grief and crisis as interpreting the PDP experience
8.1.2. “This has nothing to do with grief work”
Grief as not explaining PDP experience
8.1.3. “Grief is blocking the contact”
Grief as hindering the PDP experience
8.1.4. Summary and reflections
8.2. Grieving through PDP experiences
8.2.1. “You know what? This makes all the difference”
PDP as significant for the grief process
8.2.2. “Even though I’m sad it really makes me good”
PDP as opening emotions of grief, yet positively significant
8.2.3. “It’s pleasant, but we must move on”
PDP as ambivalent to the grief process
8.2.4. “It makes no difference”
PDP as not significant in the grief process
8.2.5. Summary and reflections
8.3. Summary and findings
215
215
215
POST DEATH PRESENCE AND WORLDVIEW
9.1. Experiencing PDP though voices of worldview
9.1.1. “The perceptions has nothing to do with my religious beliefs,
but my interpretation of it may have”
Worldview, explanations and interpretations of PDP
9.1.2. “I think there is a higher power in relation to those things”
Voices of religion and spirituality in sense making of PDP experiences
9.1.3. “I don’t need religion to understand those phenomena”
Voices of atheism and secularism in sense making of PDP experiences
9.1.4. Summary and reflections
9.2. “Worldviewing” through PDP experiences
9.2.1. “I didn’t become religious after that happening either”
Retaining worldview
9.2.2. “You have to take in other elements”
Adding aspects from other worldviews
231
231
231
207
208
209
210
213
217
218
220
221
222
224
225
226
228
229
232
238
240
241
242
244
8
“It has expanded, within the same frame”
Deepening and confirming worldview
9.2.4. “It has changed my worldview in both directions”
Moving worldview “back”
9.2.5. Summary and reflections
9.3. Summary and findings
9.2.3.
10. POST DEATH PRESENCE, GRIEF AND WORLDVIEW –
DYNAMICS OF MEANING MAKING
10.1.
10.2.
PDP experiences – dynamics of meaning making
Summary and findings
11. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
PART III: DISCUSSION
12. POST DEATH PRESENCE –
THROUGH, BETWEEN AND BEYOND GRIEF AND WORLDVIEW
12.1. Externalized continuing bonds in a spatial and porous self
12.1.1. Between internalized and externalized continuing bonds
12.1.2. PDP experiences in intermediate space
12.1.3. PDP experiences in imaginal- perceptual space
12.1.4. PDP experiences in three- dimensional space
12.1.5. PDP experiences in a multi-voiced dialogical space
12.2. Externalized continuing bonds and accommodation to grief
12.2.1. Critique of the adaptiveness-studies
12.2.2. Externalized continuing bonds as a secure base
12.2.3. Externalized continuing bonds through and beyond grief
12.2.4. Externalized continuing bonds and meaning making
12.3. Externalized continuing bonds through multi-voiced meaning making
12.3.1. Multi-voiced and dialogical sense making
12.3.2. Beyond vertical and horizontal meaning making
12.4. Summary: Experiencing post death presence through, between and beyond grief and worldview
244
248
249
251
253
253
258
259
261
263
264
264
266
269
270
271
273
273
274
277
277
279
279
282
283
PART IV: IMPLICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
285
REFERENCES
289
APPENDIXES
305
9
10
PART I: COMPOSING THE STUDY
Chapter1: INTRODUCTORY COMPOSITION1
1.1.
Background
In September 2010, the phenomenon of contact with the deceased was brought to the very top of
Norwegian media headlines. Ignited by a single sentence, some weeks of widespread public
discussion took place. The brief statement that turned into a bombshell was delivered by the
Norwegian princess, Märtha Louise.2 In a newspaper interview she said “It is not difficult to get in
contact with the dead in the same way as with the angels”3 (Stavanger Aftenblad, 2010).
As soon as the newspaper came out, responses were pouring in.4 Certainly the debate centered on
what a member of the royal family should allow herself to do and to say. However, the experience and
practice of contact with the dead was also widely discussed. News media were filled with interviews,
articles and front page headlines, which featured statements by the religious leadership, religious
scholars, psychologists, politicians, and journalists. Some psychologists claimed that contact with the
dead would hinder the grief process because it interfered with “letting go” of the dead and could “play
with people’s psychical health.”5 Some politicians labeled it as “nonsense and imagination.”6 Others
expressed that the princess had gone “too far.”7 Representatives of the Protestant Church of Norway8
underlined that keeping contact with the dead was “denying the grief and suffering related to death.”9
They further warned that it is an “unhealthy form of religiosity,”10 that is “against Christian
1
The concept “composition” is used in the headings to denote the structure and framework of the dissertation. For a
theoretical background to the concept, see section 1.6.
2
Princess Märtha Louise is daughter of the king of Norway and the fourth in line for the Norwegian throne
(www.slottet.no). Before the separation between the Church and the state in 2012, the king was formally the head of the
Church, a relation which complicated the statement of the princess.
3
Three years earlier, the same Märtha Louise had launched Astarte Education (now Astarte Inspiration), when she and her
workmate claimed that they would teach the students how to get in contact with their guardian angel. The media reactions
were strong. Astarte Inspiration still exists, and offers several courses and seminars. See www.astarte-inspiration.no
4
In order to keep the flow in this particular section, I have used another citation style than I use in the rest of the thesis.
5
Professor of psychology Tor Johan Ekeland, Vårt Land 15.10.2010 http://www.vl.no/samfunn/professor-m-rtha-kan-lekemed-folks-psykiske-helse/ (read 07.07.14)
6
Church politician Anne Tingelstad Wøien, Verdens Gang nett 14.09.2010,
http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10018333 (read 07.07.14)
7
Politician Martin Kohlberg, Aftenposten 15.9.2010. See Døving & Kraft (2013)
8
The Church of Norway is Evangelical- Lutheran. 75% of Norwegians are members. The Church is strong on rituals of
passage – baptisms, weddings and funerals. Many people seem to belong, but without believing strongly (Gilhus, 2012: 72)
9
Professor of theology Trygve Wyller, Dagbladet 13. 9 2010.
10
Bishop Erling Pettersen, Verdens Gang 13.09.2010.
11
teaching,”11 and could lead to contact with “evil spirits,”12 as well as being “disrespectful towards the
dead.”13
However, other voices soon surfaced within the media storm. A theology professor gained a hearing
by making more nuanced distinctions, such as between contact with the dead as self-actualization and
as spiritism,14 and a journalist asked about the difference between spontaneous experiences and
deliberate practice.15 Some religious scholars commented critically on the involvement of the Church
and academia,16 while several media outlets featured public figures who disclosed personal
experiences of having contact with a dead family member.17 The leader of the alternative religious
network in Norway supported the princess,18 and well known psychic mediums stated that contact with
the dead is “reducing death anxiety,”19 “is not dangerous, and can release something in the receiver.”20
Even a vicar in the protestant Church of Norway contended that talking to the dead was “meaningful
for the bereaved.”21
In other words, the media picture was complex. Various voices were arguing in different directions.
However, the majority of the “intellectual elite” that commented in the news media seemed to agree on
the following: contact with the dead is not recommended.
Three months after the debate began I did the first interviews for this thesis with people who had post
death contact experiences.
11
Bishop Laila Riksaasen Dahl, Verdens Gang 13.09.2010
Editor in a conservative Christian newspaper, Finn Jarle Sæle, Norge i Dag 20.10.2010. http://www.idag.no/ledereoppslag.php3?ID=18163 (read, 07.07.14)
13
Leader of a missionary organization, Kjetil Aano, Nettavisen 12.9.2010. See Døving & Kraft 2013
14
For instance, Professor Emeritus Notto Thelle asked if Märtha’s utterance really referred to spiritistic practice or if it was
a more inaccurate way of describing self-actualization through the guidance of an inner voice from the dead.
http://www.nrk.no/buskerud/_-martha-fjerner-folks-dodsfrykt-1.7290696 (read, 07.07.14)
15
A journalist facilitated a distinction between different forms of contact with the dead when he asked one of the bishops
about spontaneous experiences of contact with the dead. The bishop answered that she had heard stories and was not
sure, but thought perhaps this kind of spontaneous contact was a projection of a wish (Verdens Gang 13.10.2010).
16
For instance, Jens Baarvig, a professor in the history of religion who criticized the Church for not giving freedom of
religion (Aftenposten 18.09.2010 ), and religious scholar Anne Kalvig who asked religious scholars to stay with their
academic ideals and give nuanced reflections and respect for their object of study
http://vgdebatt.vgb.no/2010/09/23/240/ (read, 07.07.14)
17
For instance the actress Mia Gundersen who experienced supernatural things after the death of her mother
http://www.tv2.no/a/3291670 (read 07.07.14) and Lars Monsen, a Norwegian explorer who felt his dead brother was
helping him in the wilderness, http://www.vg.no/rampelys/tv/lars-monsen-jeg-har-kontakt-med-de-doede/a/10082819/
(read, 07.07.14)
18
http://www.nrk.no/norge/de-alternative-roser-martha-louise-1.7293251 (read, 07.07.14)
19
http://www.nrk.no/buskerud/_-martha-fjerner-folks-dodsfrykt-1.7290696 (read, 07.07.14)
20
Medium Gro Helen Tørrum,
http://www.kjendis.no/2010/09/15/kjendis/martha_louise/kongefamilien/spiritisme/13398412/ (read, 07.07.14)
21
Vicar Anders P. Skeistrand, http://www.ostlendingen.no/ringsaker-blad/stotter-martha-louise-1.5694518 (read, 07.07.14)
12
12
1.1.1.
Motivational background
The idea of the project, however, started earlier. I had been a volunteer worker at the Alternative Fair
for some years22 and had seen the phenomenon of contact with the dead in different forms, such as
mediums offering personal “sittings”23 and people telling stories about spontaneous experiences. I
also became aware of new television programs that featured mediated contact with the dead.24 Articles
in glossy magazines highlighting people with experiences of contact with dead relatives and friends, as
well as stories of haunted houses, continued to appear, and colleagues of mine working in the Church
reported increased disclosures by bereaved who sensed the presence of deceased family members. I
became interested in this phenomenon, which seemed to be increasingly visible in Norwegian culture,
and I wanted to investigate how it was experienced and understood. As my academic background is in
theology and psychology, I was particularly interested in the phenomenon as a nexus of religious and
psychological understandings, and I decided to place the study within the discipline of the psychology
of religion. A review of the relevant research literature showed few contributions of qualitative
phenomenological studies regarding the experience of post death contact. This led me to consider
those who experience such contact. How do they perceive and experience the contact with the dead?
How do they make sense of what they experience in dialogue with the different cultural interpretations
and normative statements they encounter? What is the significance of such experiences in their daily
life?
Following those questions, I interviewed 16 persons who had post death contact experiences. The
further development of the research questions, the research design, the theoretical approach, and the
unit of analysis are discussed in the following chapter. However, before I begin discussion, I will
provide details of the contextual background of the phenomenon of contact with the deceased.
22
I was volunteering for a Christian organization called Areopagos (www.areopagos.org), which offered counselling to
visitors at the Alternative Fair. The Alternative Fair is a market where different actors and organizations in the field of
spirituality and health have stands and promote their services and ideologies. The Alternative Fair is arranged in different
cities in Norway at different weekends throughout the year. In 2013, 100,000 visitors attended different Alternative Fairs in
Norway (www.altnett.no).
23
A “sitting” is a personal consultation in which the medium is said to connect a person with his/her dead relatives or
friends and to convey a message from the dead person or persons.
24
Examples are the programs “Power of the Spirits, which is about haunted houses and “Liza Williams: Life among the
Dead,” in which a medium helps selected people in the audience to get in contact with their dead family members or
friends.
13
1.1.2.
Contextual background
In broadening the perspective from the Norwegian context and debate, one finds that the phenomenon
of post death contact exists in many parts of the world. Some researchers have even suggested that it
is a worldwide phenomenon, although the form and way of relating to the dead differs according to the
context25 (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). In some countries, contact between the living and the dead is
ritualized, and the idea that the dead continue to live after death is commonly accepted. In Japan, for
instance, offerings are made to deceased relatives at household shrines or at public Shinto shrines
during certain festivals, and in return the dead may be consulted for guidance. In African countries,
such as Zimbabwe, the bereaved ask the recently deceased to intercede with the ancestral spirits (the
long dead) on their behalf (Walter, 2009).
In Northern Europe and North America, however, contact with a dead relative or friend is usually not
socially framed and ritualized the same way as it is in the mentioned examples from Africa and Asia.
Spiritistic practices, in which groups of people gather around a certain ritual, is certainly present in
society and the number of spiritualist churches in the West is growing.26 The business of psychic
mediums conveying personal messages from the dead has expanded (Kraft, 2011). Yet, the
phenomenon of post death contact also has a more spontaneous and private form which perhaps is the
most widespread: the individual feel the presence of a deceased spouse, parent or friend, the bereaved
talk to the dead at the graveside, or people experience unrest in the house (Walter, 2009).
Sensing the presence of the deceased is quite common in the West. It is estimated that 40 to 50 % of
American and English mourners believe they have experienced such contact with their dead relative or
friend (Klugman, 2006; Rees, 1971, 2001; Schucher & Zisook, 1993). This percentage is thought to be
even higher because there may be a reluctance among the perceivers to disclose the occurrence of
contact for fear of ridicule (Rees, 2001), having it explained away (Parker, 2005) or being thought of
as mad or stupid (Hayes, 2011). There are no recent surveys mapping the prevalence of a sense of
presence in Norway, as far as I know, but in a survey from 1991 among a representative Norwegian
sample, 12 % said that they have had contact with dead people (Bøygum, 1992).27 There are also a
25
For instance, the way of relating to the dead is different in the West than it is in the African context. In Africa, persons
often have a relation with the ancestor driven more by fear than by care (Walter, 2009).
26
The number of spiritualist churches is growing in the West. In England, for instance, there are around 1,000 spiritualist
churches, which often have more visitors than the Christian churches (Laugerud, 2012). In Norway, The Norwegian
Spiritualist Union was established in 2007 and works with the Norwegian Spiritualist Church, which is a religious
community. The union has its main office in Oslo, but has office branches in Bergen, Stavanger, and Sarpsborg. All the
offices have regular spiritual member nights, and the church holds regular spiritualistic masses (www.spiritualist.no).
27
Answering yes in this survey could also indicate contact with dead people through a medium, and in contrast to the
studies among newly bereaved, this study was undertaken with a representative sample of the whole Norwegian
population (Bøygum, 1992).
14
couple of studies among bereaved, although with a lower number of participants, that indicate the
same picture in a Scandinavian context. 28
Some scholars assume that the privatization and to a certain degree lack of ritualization correspond to
traditionally strong negative valuations of the phenomenon in Western society, which originate in the
Protestant church and secular ideas (Walter, 2007). As was visible in the Norwegian media debate
after Princess Märtha Louise’s statement, both conservative and liberal Protestants discourage seeking
contact with the dead. Conservatives take seriously the Old Testament’s ban against visiting
mediums29 to receive advice from dead people, and what they see as a biblical teaching about a strict
border between the living and the dead (Walter, 2007). Thus, seeking contact should not happen. The
liberal branch, on the other hand, emphasizes that such supernatural phenomena do not exist and
accordingly “real” experiences with the dead cannot happen (Henriksen & Pabst, 2013; Walter, 2007).
The liberal branch is in line with secularism, which argues that the dead have no spiritual existence,
hence, communication with a dead soul is impossible. With regard to spontaneous feelings of the
presence of a dead relative or friend, the attitude from both conservatives and liberals is more
ambivalent (Rees, 2001).30 Psychological secular theories, drawing on a medical model of grief, do
however regard certain spontaneous experiences as dysfunctional, stating that continuing bonds with
the dead will cause stagnation in the grief process (Field & Filanosky, 2010). Together, these
traditions agree that the dead may be memorialized, but not called on (Walter, 2009).
However, as the Norwegian media debate evidenced, other approaches encourage contact with the
dead in the Northwest Europe and brings the phenomenon out in the social and mediatized world. I
have already mentioned certain television programs and articles in weekly magazines, which have
increased in both numbers and viewers in recent years.31 These programs and articles have given space
to the alternative spiritual movement,32 including spiritualism and reincarnation, as well as what is
28
Two Scandinavian studies, although having a low number of participants (N = 50 and 39, respectively) showed a high
incidence of the sense of presence phenomena among bereaved. A study conducted in Sweden reported the sense of the
presence of the dead phenomena among 83% of the widows studied (Grimby, 1998), and a Norwegian study found a
prevalence of 75% (Lindstrøm, 1995) See also literature review in chapter 2.
29
Prohibitions against using a medium to contact the dead can be found in Leviticus 19: 31; Deutreronomy 18: 10-11 and 1
Samuel 28
30
This attitude was apparent in the interview with the bishop Laila Riksaasen Dahl. See footnote 12
31
The television program “Power of the Spirits” (“Åndenes makt”) in 2013 had approximately a half million viewers in
Norway (https://nb-no.facebook.com/andenesmakt, read 29.08.2014). The weekly magazines were found to have ten times
as many editorial articles about spirits in 2007 as they did in 1967 (Romarheim, 2011). However, the number of articles
about spirits have decreased again the later years in favor of articles featuring mindfulness (Romarheim, 2014).
32
Different conceptualizations and terms are used to denote the religiosity that emerged in the West in the 70ies/ 80ies:
New Age, new religiosity, new spirituality, spirituality, alternative religiosity and alternative spirituality, just to mention
some of the most common terms. I have chosen to use the term alternative spirituality. This term may include both the
term New Age and the term new spirituality, which some researchers believe are two distinguishable groups in Norway,
although New Age may be gradually giving way to new spirituality (Botvar, 2009, Heelas & Woodhead, 2004). None of the
proposed terms are very good. The prefix “new” is not appropriate as these forms of spirituality draws on older traditions.
Just using spirituality is not distinctive enough to denote a difference from for instance Christian spirituality. “Alternative” is
15
often termed as the folk belief or folk religiosity with focus on ghosts, apparitions, and haunted houses.
The folk belief, which has a long history in the Scandinavian countries, has traditionally been related
to a certain type of working-class fatalism (Ahlin, 2001) and thus has not been accepted by all walks
of society. Now, however, the ghost and haunted house phenomena are being legitimized by a broader
spectrum of society, through the literary and popular culture (Walter, 2007; Romarheim, 2004b, 2007).
Similarly, spiritism,33 which is often connected to the occult movement in the 1800s and is considered
the roots of alternative spirituality, has gained a broader hearing through the media’s focus and
generally through the increase in alternative spirituality in Western Europe (Botvar, 2007; Hanegraaff,
1998; Heelas & Woodhead, 2005). Spiritists claim that the living can communicate with the dead
through a medium or through different techniques as pendulum, glass and Ouija board as well as
automatic writing (Mehren, 2011). In 21st century variant, spiritism often manifests in personal
channeling in which mediums help people to connect with their dead and clear their houses of negative
energies and spirits (Kraft, 2011). This form of using psychic mediums is now spread out in popular
culture and is easily accessible through the internet (Endsjø & Lied, 2011; Kalvig, 2012, 2013).
There are different understandings among researchers about how spiritualism, alternative spirituality,
New Age, new spirituality, folk-religiosity and popular belief relate to each other (Selberg, 2011).
However, what is put forward by several religious scholars is that in contemporary religiosity the
different traditions are often blended, the boundaries are blurred, and religion appears in hybrid forms,
also in combinations with Christian spirituality (Bender, Cadge, Levitt and Smilde, 2013; Gilhus,
2012; Mc Guire, 2008; Selberg, 2011). Thus, folk beliefs may be intertwined with New Age and
spiritism and reinforce a positive attitude towards contacting the dead. Alternative religious- and folk
religious beliefs may influence Christian beliefs with the same result. As people can be seen as
multireligious actors (Gilhus & Mikaelsson, 2000) they combine their interpretive resources from
different traditions and in turn contribute to hybridization.
Within a larger frame, experiences of contact with the dead may also be considered justified through
what has been called the subjective turn of modern culture, which deemphasizes external authority and
emphasizes personal experience as valued in and of itself (Heelas & Woodhead, 2005; Walter, 2007).
neither a good term, as these forms of spirituality is not so alternative anymore. However, in order to make a choice I opted
for the term alternative spirituality which can be used as a larger concept including New Age and spirituality, and also, when
needed, be analytically distinguish from Christian religiosity and spirituality. See also section 1.3.4.
33
Some use spiritualism and spiritism interchangeably, while others make a distinction between the two. In distinguishing
the two, spiritualism implies the belief in the spiritual quality of the world and universe whereas spiritism denotes the belief
in contact with the dead (Mehren, 1999). I use the term spiritism when referring to contact with the dead through a
medium or through other spiritistic rituals. However, when referring to the spiritualist church and its teaching about the
spiritual world, I use spiritualism.
16
Thus, normative statements by church leaders and “the intellectual elite” may be challenged by relying
on subjective experience, and by the use of alternative resources to make meaning.
The media’s focus and the broader movements in society may have contributed to the change in
attitude among people in Norway towards the phenomenon of contact with the dead. In 1998, 16 %
answered yes to the question “Under certain circumstances it is possible to have contact with dead
people?” (Lund, 1999). In 2008, the item was reformulated to “Do you believe in the supernatural
powers of the deceased ancestors?” This may have elicited different responses than did the former
question in 1998. However, 18 % answered yes in the latter version (Mortensen, 2010). A public
opinion poll in 2007 indicated that 22.4 % believed “to a large extent” that it was possible to get in
contact with dead people (Visendi, 2007). Although the different surveys in Norway cannot be used to
verify the increased belief in contact with the dead because different items and methodological
approaches were used, one can speculate about whether the understanding has been more positive in
recent years.
In England, some sociological studies have noticed a shift in the sense of presence of dead loved ones.
Whereas earlier researchers found that informants often said they had not previously mentioned the
experience to anyone, this is now changing (Walter, 2009). A change is also visible in the
psychological area, specifically among promoters of recent grief models. Since the 1990s, such
researchers have noticed the prevalence of after death communication and have thus been open to the
possibility that continuing relationships with the dead could potentially be adaptive for the bereaved
(Marwit & Klass, 1996; Rees, 2001; Stroebe & Schut, 2001; Walter, 1994, 1996). The new grief
models, however, are not widespread, and they coexist with the belief that post death contact causes
dysfunction (Walter, 2009).
Thus, the new thoughts around grief, the media’s focus on the phenomenon, the alternative religious
movement, together with the folk tradition have all contributed to increasing the visibility of the
experience and perhaps making it more acceptable in Northwestern Europe. Nonetheless, contacting
the dead is not validated by a large group of religious and secular authorities, particularly with regard
to visiting a medium. This makes the cultural situation complex.
17
In summary, this background chapter has served two main purposes. First, it has provided the
motivational background of this project, that is, my personal experiences in dialogue with both the
field and the extant literature. Second, the background chapter has explored the cultural context and
some significant voices that are present both in Norway and in the West, and which people who
experience contact with the deceased encounter. Some of these voices will be drawn from the
background to the foreground throughout this thesis as they are in dialogue with the experience of post
death contact, which I will now elaborate further.
1.2.
Foreground
Until now, I have painted with a broad brush. When examining the media debate and the diverse
cultural voices and experiences, I have included what can be seen as different expressions under the
umbrella of the phenomenon contact with the dead. I will now present a more narrowly focused
examination of the phenomenon to be studied. First, I will distinguish it from what is often considered
as other related phenomena under the post death contact umbrella. I then will narrow the phenomenon
further and move towards the experience that I have called the post death presence.
1.2.1.
The phenomenon of post death contact - delineations
The first point of delimitation is to restrict the study to contact with dead relatives, spouses, or friends,
that is, people who were well known to the perceiver when they were alive. This focus leaves out
some related phenomena. First, it fails to account for contact with apparitions, such as St. Mary, or
masters, such as Jesus or Buddha. Second, haunted houses, which refers to the repeated activity of
poltergeists (Irwin & Watt, 2007), can partly be delineated based on the same premises because dead
people experienced in haunted houses are often not known by or close to the experiencer. Moreover,
poltergeists are in most cases restricted to certain places or houses and, unlike the phenomena I will
study, are usually not directed towards a particular living person. However, the phenomena may be
overlapping if the deceased experienced in the house is a family member. Spiritistic séances using
glass and Ouija boards in order to contact the spirits are often regarded as a separate phenomenon due
to its rituals and deliberate practice. Moreover, it is not particularly connected to the experience of
deceased family members and close friends. The same is the case for ghost phenomena, which often
18
are perceived as somnambulistic, and do not usually resemble a close family member or friend (Irwin
& Watt, 2007). However, the boundaries are not impermeable.
The second point is that the phenomenon I want to study is experienced when fully awake. It can thus
be distinguished from near-death experiences (NDE). NDEs occur when someone is clinically dead,
and the experiencer is in a state often described as “out of body” (Irwin & Watt, 2007), whereas the
form of contact with the dead I intend to explore is experienced in full consciousness (Walter, 2009).
In principle, deathbed visions could, however, be included as part of the phenomenon. Deathbed
visions occur when someone on his or her deathbed reports an experience of a deceased person that
appears to be welcoming him or her home (Walter, 2009). This person could be a dead family
member or a close friend. However, deathbed visions are difficult to study for both methodological
and ethical reasons as it involves a dying person. It is thus not included in the present study.
1.2.2.
From post death contact to post death presence
Having distinguished the phenomenon of study from other related phenomena, I will further
circumscribe the form of contact with dead family and friends that I have chosen to research.
The British sociologist Tony Walter has described two key variables of the phenomenon in which the
spirit of a deceased family or friend is perceived to communicate with the living. The first variable
concerns whether a professional medium is used or not. The second variable is whether the living
person actively seeks contact (Walter, 2007). With respect to the first variable, I have chosen to focus
on people who experience the contact “directly,”34 not through a medium. Visiting a medium, being
approached by a medium, or attending a spiritualistic meeting are thus excluded as experiences of
receiving a message mediated through a professional person. It can be argued that this limitation
eliminates an experience which is growing and is of current interest from the discussion. As
mentioned above, going to a medium is in some traditions the most controversial form of after death
communication; hence, it could be an interesting focus in analyzing the ordering of meaning. It would
accordingly be relevant to study how people who have visited a medium attribute meaning to what
they are told—in relation to their daily lives and especially in relation to their worldviews and beliefs.
On the other hand, focusing only on professionally mediated experiences would leave out the
phenomenology of the “direct” experience of the dead in terms of the sensory modalities of smell,
34
That the contact is experienced “directly”—in this frame of reference— does not mean that the experience is not
mediated through cultural resources, but it does mean that the experience is not mediated through a professional medium,
who connects people with their dead family and friends.
19
touch, vision, and so on, which calls for further research (see chapter 2) and is relevant to
psychological investigation. Moreover, it would leave out the perhaps most prevalent experience, that
is, the sense of the presence of the deceased. Because I do not propose to cast the net too widely,35 I
have opted for the experiences of sensing and feeling the presence of the deceased without the
assistance of a professional medium.
Tony Walter’s second main variable—whether the contact is intended and willed or the dead appear
unbidden—is left open to the analysis of the material. However, as a starting point, I take Tony
Walters’ suggestion of viewing the various forms of post death contact on a continuum with different
forms of interaction, from the spontaneous search to the active search for the dead (Walter, 2007).
These different forms of experienced interaction between the living and the dead are, in fact, part of
what the empirical material in this study will be used to elucidate.
The phenomenon of study is thus contact with a dead family member or friend, experienced when fully
awake and not through a professional medium.
Some scholars include extra vivid dreams of interaction with a dead person (Klugman, 2006) in the
phenomenon of sensing the presence of the deceased, and some include perceived movement of
objects that are linked to the dead and interpreted as signs (Klass, 2006). Examples of the latter are
feathers found in strange places, electricity that is switched on and off, and tables that shake. Because
I want to focus on experiences while awake, I have left out dreams, but I have included the linked
objects because they are commonly experienced and conceptually they may overlap with the sense of
presence and sensory experiences. I will return to the differentiation and concurrently appearance of
phenomena in the analysis chapter, where I examine the characteristics of the experience.
Although there are different conceptualizations in the research literature, often included in the
phenomenon of contact with the dead is the experience of sensory perceptions, in which the living feel
he or she can see, hear, and smell the dead, as well as the quasi sensory feeling of the presence of a
deceased person, which often is called sense of presence (Steffen & Coyle, 2010).
Contact with the dead or post death contact is thus a general phenomenon which, as I see it, includes
different, narrower phenomena. To denote the narrow approach I have chosen, I prefer to call the
phenomenon under study the post death presence (PDP). Included in the phenomenon of PDP as I
circumscribe it, is the following:
35
See the paragraph on sampling in section 4.2.
20
1. Post death sensory perceptions: visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory and gustative perceptions of
a deceased person.
2. Post death sense of presence: quasi-sensory feeling of presence of a deceased person.
3. Post death signs of presence: experiences of (movement of) objects linked to the dead.
It is the individual’s relation to and involvement in the phenomenon of post death presence which I
want to examine. The approach is to study the individual’s experience and related meaning making. In
other words, the phenomenon under study is the post death presence (PDP). The topic is the
experience of PDP, and the unit of analysis is the individual’s experiences of PDP and related meaning
making.
1.3.
Focus
1.3.1.
Development of research questions
I have proposed that the unit of analysis is the experience of the post death presence and the related
meaning making. I will now articulate this in specific research questions. Making my way to the final
version has been a process of dialogue with the field, as described in section 1.1, and with the extant
literature. The first research question was derived from reading the extant literature and realizing that
the research on the phenomenology of the PDP experience is scarce (see chapter 2). The
characterization of the perceptions and experiences is therefore the first focus. The aim of this part is
to give a rich description of how, what, where and when the PDP experience happens. The first
research question is formulated as follows:
1. What characterizes post death presence experiences?
The second question concerns the meaning of the PDP experience. The focus on meaning related to
the PDP experience is connected to the literature on grief and PDP, in which meaning making is
delineated as important for further research (see chapter 2.). However, it is also related to the multiple
voices that are present in Norwegian culture and the controversial role of the phenomenon, as I have
described in section 1.1. I am interested in how people make meaning in this complex cultural setting,
which leads to the second research question:
2. How do people make meaning- and what are the meanings- of their post death presence
experiences?
21
Dividing the two questions into experience and meaning, respectively, does not imply that I see
experience and meaning as completely separate. To put it another way, an experience is also
meaningfully interpreted, but in my view, there are different levels of interpretation. In analyzing the
material, I will engage with the different levels in order to explore the experience of PDP (Smith,
Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). I will return to the relation between experience and meaning in the
methods chapter and in the analysis chapter (section 4.1 and Part III).
In order to grasp the wide concept of meaning, I have divided the second question into two subquestions. This is based on conceptualizations in grief research within the continuing bonds paradigm
(see chapter 2), which distinguishes between meaning making as sense making and significance (Davis
& Nolen-Hoeksema, 2001; Gillies & Neimeyer, 2006; Janoff-Bulman & Frantz, 1997). Sense making
denotes the understanding, comprehensibility, or explanation of the experience. The significance
refers to the valuation or worth of the experience, or the function it has in daily life. In accordance
with that, the second research question becomes the following:
2a. How do people make sense of their post death presence experiences?
2b. What is the significance of post death presence to those who experience them?
1.3.2.
Clarification of concepts: meaning making, perceptions, experiences, and post death
presence
Having defined the phenomenon of post death presence and distinguished between two different, but
related, forms of meaning making, I will in the following give some additional clarifications of the
term meaning making. I then will clarify the use of the terms, experience and perceptions, which are
crucial in the thesis. Finally, I will further discuss the term, post death presence.
It is difficult to operationalize the concept of meaning. In the psychology of religion, for instance,
there is no widely accepted model of meaning (Park, 2005). I have approached the concept by
dividing it into sense making and significance. In addition to that, in order to grasp what I find as a
complexity in the process of meaning making, I use the theory of the Dialogical Self (Hermans &
Kempen, 1993), which I will elaborate further in the theory chapter and refer to in the analysis and
discussion. Shortly now, I will just clarify that through the conceptual framework of Dialogical Self
Theory meaning making is seen as movement between different I- positions or voices. Voices can be
worldviews, practices, opinions, beliefs, feelings and so on. Situated in complex religious and cultural
22
contexts (see section 1.1. and section 3.1.), meaning-making is assumed to be negotiated with
reference to different and divergent voices. Further, people may slide and move between those
different voices, which may or may not be systemic, coherent, and stable. Meaning making, both as
sense making and as significance, is thus understood as a dynamic process, with an open end. Further,
meaning making is more than a cognitive process as both cognition, emotion and action are
intertwined in the voices.
The research questions also concern the experiences of the PDP. This term requires clarification. In
the Norwegian language, we distinguish between “opplevelse” and “erfaring”, which are both often
translated in English as experience. “Opplevelse” is considered a spontaneous experience that is not
necessarily consciously reflected on, whereas “erfaring” is reflected on and can change perspectives
(Henriksen & Christoffersen, 2010). According to this understanding, experience as “erfaring”
develops over time through reflection (Sky, 2013). As applied in this study, an immediate experience
(“opplevelse”) of PDP through reflection becomes an experience (“erfaring”). In writing in English,
one could use the phrase immediate experience when referring to less reflected on experience, and use
experience when analyzing the meaning making related to the experience. However, it is not always
easy to draw a line between immediate experience and reflected experience. One may then ask what
kind of—or how much—reflection is needed in order to use the word experience (“erfaring”)?
Moreover, as the interviews expresses the participants reflected experiences and through that, they
feature stories of immediate experiences retrospectively, it is not easy to make a clear distinction in the
language in use. The aim of this study is neither to make this distinction but instead to engage in
different layers of reflection. Thus experience is used as a broad term including many levels of
interpretation and reflection. I will return to the use of the term in section 4.1, where I discuss
experience in the light of the interpretative and phenomenological approach to the study. However, in
the meantime, I will conceptualize experience as a continuum between immediate experience and that
which is deliberately reflected on, although the process is non-linear. Purely immediate experience, as
I see it, is not accessible. Because we witness the immediate experience after the event, it always will
be interpreted (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). I will thus use the term experience, except from
when the participants are deliberately using the Norwegian “opplevelse” as clearly distinguished from
the subsequent meaning making. Then I will in the English translation use immediate experience, and
sometimes perception, which I will elaborate in the following.
Perception is not used in the research questions, but it relates closely to the research questions, as it
denotes the PDP experiences through perceptual modalities. As I will use the term perception in the
analysis, I will clarify how I understand the concept and how it is related to experience. I see the term
perception as describing how we come to know what is going on around us. Perception is defined as a
23
“general term [used] to describe the whole process of how we come to know what is going on around
us; the entire sequence of events from the presentation of a physical stimulus to the phenomenological
experiencing of it” (Atkinson, Atkinson, Smith, & Bem, 1993: A-48). Perception can be understood
as a process from the stimulus to the experience. However, as in experience, this process is not
linear.36 (Holt, Bremner, Sutherland, Vliek, Passer, M. & Smith, 2012). This draws attention to the
relation between perception and experience, which is discussed in psychology. The question concerns
the role that earlier experiences have in the selection of stimuli and interpretation of the perceptions. I
see perceptions as both bottom up and top down, that is, perceptions encompass both sensing and
interpretation. However, this form of interpretation is related to the identification of the object that is
perceived (Kosslyn & Rosenberg, 2011). Applied in my study, the term perception includes the
interpretation of what people experience when they for instance are seeing a shadow in the living
room. The interpretation of the perception must explain what they see and hear and who or what the
shadow resembles. Researchers have increasingly approached the study of perception by investigating
the problems that the perceptual system is designed to solve. Two general issues are often mentioned:
the perceptual system must determine what objects are out there, and where these objects are (Holt et
al., 2012). These two forms of interpreting the perceptions are addressed in the analysis presented in
chapter 6.
The psychology of perception is the study of how experience is created, which includes the study of
how perceptual processing is formulated through biological, environmental, and psychological
processes (Holt et al., 2012). In my study, I will not use specific perceptual theories to address the
different cognitive, neurological and sensory mechanisms found in the perceptions. I will instead use
the term perception to denote how the phenomenon of the dead appears to the perceiver through
sensory modalities. Thus, the concept perception can be used parallel to immediate experiences, but
the focus of the analysis when using perception is more on the quality, content and process of
perception through different perceptual modalities.
In discussing the phenomenon of PDP, I included sensory perceptions as part of the phenomenon I
want to study. The sensory perceptions of PDP encompass auditory, visual, tactile, olfactory and
gustatory experiences of the deceased. The sensory perceptions of a deceased person stimulate the
controversial side of the experience, because according to traditional psychology, there is no external
stimulation of the relevant sensory organ and no external stimuli are present. The presumed lack of
veridicality has led to the belief that PDP phenomena are hallucinations. When I describe the sensory
36
Bottom-up processing takes in individual elements from the stimulus and combines them into a unified perception. Top –
down processing occurs in the opposite direction, where sensory information is interpreted in the light of existing
knowledge, concepts, ideas, and expectations (Holt et al., 2012: 163)
24
modalities, I understand the concept of perceptions as peculiar or extraordinary perceptions,37 where
peculiar or extraordinary is understood as “either its genesis or physical nature is difficult to explain”
(Berenbaum, Kerns, & Ragahvan, 2000: 28).
This brings me to the last reflection, which is on the choice of the term post death presence (PDP).
There are several conceptualizations of the phenomenon of experiencing the presence of the deceased
that reflect different points of view of the ontology of the dead, and the valuation of the experience. I
take as a starting point the reported perceptions and experiences of the participants. This means that I
endeavor not to make judgments about the “reality” of these perceptions. In my study, which is based
on hermeneutics and phenomenology, I want to stay “experience close” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin,
2009: 33), and I reflect that position in the term I use. For instance, I do not employ the concept of
hallucination, as some researchers have done (Field 2008; Harvard Mental Health Letter, 2006) to
denote an ontology that preconceives that the dead does not exist.38 Moreover, I do not use concepts
such as the living dead (Rees, 2001). Although this concept could be seen as close to some
participants’ understanding, it might imply the preconception that the dead exist ontologically as living
spirits. The term intrusion phenomenon, which is used in the literature on trauma (Dyregrov, 2006),
alludes to a view of the experience as negatively valuated by the experiencer. Because I want the
significance and valuation of the experience to be open, this term is not appropriate.
Several conceptualizations in the literature are closer to the content of the experience, for instance post
death contact (Klugman, 2006), after death communication (Kwilecki, 2011), encounters with the
dead (Haraldsson, 2009), sense of presence, which sometimes includes sensory perceptions (Keen,
Murray, & Payne 2013; Steffen & Coyle, 2010, 2011; Walter, 2009) and experiencing the presence of
the deceased (Hayes, 2011). I have chosen to call the phenomenon the post death presence (PDP).
As discussed in section 1.2.2., post death presence denotes a narrower approach than the concept post
death contact does. On the other hand, PDP can be viewed as a broad term as presence also comprises
experiences in which there is no perceived exchange of impulses or communication between the living
and the dead, but just a feeling or a vision that the dead is “there.” I have accordingly developed the
concept of post death presence in dialogue with the phenomenon and the material under study.
I define post death presence as occurring: When a living individual senses that a person who is
deceased is present.
37
Extraordinary perceptions is a more open concept than extrasensory perceptions (ESP) is, which refers to a
parapsychological frame of reference.
38
I will return to hallucinations as “false perceptions” or “cognitive mistakes” in section 1.5.2.
25
In the conflict between what in the West is commonly seen as real and the perceived sense of this
experience as real, PDP is sometimes classified as an extraordinary (Parker, 2005), paranormal
(Parra, 2006), anomalous (Cardeña, Lynn & Krippner, 2000), or ideonecrophanic (Mac Donald, 1992)
experience. When I describe the meaning making of the experience in dialogue with cultural
understanding, I will sometimes refer to the PDP as an extraordinary experience, but I will mainly use
the term which I think stays close to the experience I want to examine, namely the post death presence.
1.3.3.
Secondary research questions
In my study of meaning making, I will look specifically at the connections between the PDP
experience, grief, and worldview. This perspective has evolved into to some “second-tier research
questions” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009: 48). The second-tier or secondary research questions are
theoretically informed, and they are secondary because they can only be answered at a more
interpretative stage (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). Their formulation evolved in dialogue with the
theories chosen as a framework for this study and in the review of the extant literature. The secondary
questions bring worldview and grief into the sense making and significance of the experiences.
Theoretical interest in grief and worldview emerged in my reading of the literature, but it was also
developed in dialogue with the material. However, I was all the way open to rejecting the secondary
questions, and as I will later elaborate, the primary research questions were used together with the
secondary to formulate the interview questions and later, to structure the analysis.
Theoretically, the questions are based on the Continuing Bonds Theory, which I chose as one of my
theoretical approaches (see section 3.2), in particular on Dennis Klass’s position in the continuing
bonds paradigm. The questions are further influenced by the other main theory used in the conceptual
framework, that is, the Dialogical Self Theory (see section 3.1.). The concept of voices is drawn from
this theory and denotes the cultural, social and individual resources used in meaning making. The
secondary research questions are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
How do PDP perceivers use voices of grief in their sense making?
What is the significance of PDP for the perceiver’s process of grief?
How do PDP perceivers use voices of worldview in their sense making?
What is the significance of PDP for the perceiver’s process of worldview?
The secondary research questions express the three focus points of the dissertation: experience of
PDP, grief, and worldview. The relation between grief, worldview, and PDP experience is complex
26
because different layers of interpretation and meaning making are present. This complex relation will
be the main focus of the analysis.
PDP
Worldview
Grief
Figure 1.1.3a. Three focal points of the dissertation: PDP experience, grief, and worldview
Meaning making, which is divided into sense making and significance, is studied in relation to both
grief and worldview. Worldview and grief and sense making and significance are all related to PDP
experience in the focus of this study (see Figure 1.1.3b).
PDP experience
Worldview
Grief
Sense making
Significance
Figure 1.1.3.b. The focal points of the secondary research questions
27
1.3.4.
Clarification of concepts: grief and worldview
The term grief, which is used in the research questions, needs clarification. Although there are
different theories and approaches to grief, there is reasonable agreement among researchers with
respect to concepts associated with grief, such as bereavement, grief and mourning (Stroebe, Hansson,
Stroebe & Shut, 2001).
The term bereavement is often understood as referring to “the objective situation of having lost
someone significant” (Stroebe et al., 2001: 6). I will use it in the same way. The usual reaction to
bereavement is termed grief. Grief is defined as a “primarily emotional (affective) reaction to the loss
of a loved one through death. It incorporates diverse psychological (cognitive, social-behavioral) and
physical (physiological-somatic) manifestations” (Stroebe et al., 2001:6). Although grief is seen as the
usual reaction to bereavement, bereaved people do not necessary react to bereavement with grief.
Mourning is not mentioned in the research questions, but the term will appear in the text. In referring
to the psychoanalytic tradition, in which the followers often employ the concept of mourning
interchangeably with grief, I will use the term accordingly. Otherwise, I share the understanding of
mourning as “the social expressions or acts expressive of grief that are shaped by the practices of a
given society or cultural group” (Stroebe et al., 2001: 6). However, there is no clear distinction
between grief and mourning. For instance, crying might reflect both an emotional reaction to the loss
(grief) and the following of the social norm of weeping on certain occasions (mourning) (Stroebe et
al., 2001). With the understanding that the human being is embedded in his or her culture and society,
mourning will be seen as intertwined with grief. Thus, the two concepts can be used to refer to the
same action. In the following text, I use grief as the main term, but I see the manifestations of grief as
incorporating some of the characteristics of mourning; thus, I use the term grief in a wide sense.
When typical expressions of mourning, such as rituals, are mentioned, I will use the term mourning.
The next term I will discuss is worldview. In the present thesis I use worldview as an overarching and
unifying concept. The reason for using the term worldview instead of religion or spirituality is that it
encompasses secular forms of meaning making, as well as religious and spiritual forms. In Norway
around 30 % of the population does not believe in the existence of a god or a higher or divine being
(Botvar, 2010), thus adhering to a secular worldview that is not connected to religious ideas.
However, people with secular worldviews also experience PDP. As secular worldviews are included
in my material it requires a broad and inclusive concept. Certainly, terms such as secular sacred and
secular spirituality and even atheist spirituality (Hovi, 2012) have appeared in recent years, presenting
a possible conceptualization where spirituality would be the main, inclusive concept. However, as I
28
don’t see those of my participants who affiliate with a secular worldview as fitting any of those
concepts, the term spirituality will not cover the worldview of all the PDP perceivers in my sample.
The concept of worldview is moreover used in the official debate in Norway to point to different
views on life, with and without religious connotations,39 and as such it is an open concept, and
furthermore it is one I expect the participants to recognize. I used the term worldview (“livssyn”) in
the interviews (in addition to religion and spirituality as follow ups to the participants’ use of those
terms). By using worldview in the research questions and as an analytical category, I connect to the
language in the material. Another reason for choosing worldview is that this term is employed and
conceptualized by Dennis Klass, one of the two main theorists referred to in the dissertation.
According to Klass, worldviews are “beliefs, myths, rituals, and symbols by which individuals and
communities answer two questions: ‘How does the universe function?’ and: ‘What place do humans
occupy within the universe?’” (Klass, 1999: 126). I follow Klass’ definition in my use of the concept
worldview, but I will elaborate more on the premise in the following.
There are places in the literature of the psychology of religion where the concept of worldview, or
view of life, is introduced (Danbolt, 2013; DeMarinis, 2008; Schnell & Keenan, 2011). However,
when an umbrella term is required to encompass a wide range of meaning systems, the phrase
existential meaning making is often used.40 The term existential may imply the belief that each
individual has an existential dimension and a spiritual nature (DeMarinis, 2008), and this is sometimes
connected to the philosophical tradition of existentialism (la Cour & Hvidt, 2010). DeMarinis (2008)
has combined existential and worldview in the phrase existential worldview and has outlined a
typology involving different existential worldview categories. Worldview, existential worldview and
existential meaning making are terms used in countries that are considered to be more secular than the
US, such as the Scandinavian countries. However, their use also points to a growing interest in secular
forms of meaning making in the psychology of religion, in general41 (Hood, Hill, & Spilka, 2009: 286;
Schnell & Keenan, 2013). Because I do not connect the study theoretically to an existentialist
philosophy, and I do not take as a starting point the spiritual nature of the human being, I find the term
worldview to be more open, although existential meaning making could have been used had it been
defined in an open way.
The danger of using the concept worldview is that it can be associated with a whole system of thought
that assumes a coherent view of life: Either you have a Christian worldview, an atheistic worldview,
39
For instance, in the debate around the school subject Religion, Worldview, and Ethics (RLE), in which worldview often
refers to a non-religious view of life. The official report “Det livssynsåpne samfunn,” in English “The worldview open
society” uses worldview to refer to different views of life, both religious and non-religious (NOU, 2013: 1).
40
This is not least in the religion and health research conducted in Denmark and Sweden (DeMarinis, 2008; 2013; LaCour &
Hvidt, 2010)
41
See also Coleman and Silver’s www.religiousstudyproject.com and their page in Facebook on non-belief research in
America.
29
an alternative worldview, and so forth. In this context there is no mix of bits and pieces. Worldview
can also comprise cognitive associations. It is then understood as thoughts rather than feelings,
actions or experiences. As the discussion of meaning pointed out, reducing worldview to cognitive
and coherent units is not the approach of this study. Neither is this the approach of Dennis Klass in his
conceptualization of worldview. According to Klass, worldviews are most often not systematic, they
are experiential and in use, and are “made of symbols woven deeply into the people’s self and world”
(Klass, 1999: 141).
Despite the objections, however, I have chosen to use the term worldview, and the theory chapter will
elaborate more thoroughly on my premises. At this point I will say that worldviews in use, which is
what I intend to study, is employed quite similarly to religious, spiritual and secular meaning making.
Worldviews in use, or worldviewing, which I introduce in the analysis chapter to articulate this
dynamic approach, is employed as an umbrella term.
Following on from that, I will provide some reflections on how I see the relationship between
religious, spiritual and secular meaning making.
The relationship between religiosity (the personal correlate of religion) and spirituality is widely
discussed in the psychology of religion (Belzen, 2010; Hood, 2012). Some see religiosity as a broad
construct encompassing spirituality,42 while others hold spirituality to be the broader construct
encompassing religion43 (Pargament & Zinnbauer, 2005). Others again propose that the relationship
between religiosity and spirituality can best be illustrated by two partly overlapping circles44 (Belzen,
2005; 2010; Stifoss-Hanssen, 1999). I prefer to include the secular orientation, and consider religious,
spiritual and secular meaning making as three partly overlapping circles (la Cour & Hvidt, 2010). The
use of overlapping circles allows for combinations of religiosity and spirituality, but also allows for
secularity in combination or hybridity with religious or spiritual orientations. This also allows for
identifying with only one of the concepts, for instance as being spiritual, but not religious, which is the
42
For instance, Pargament, who makes the following distinction: “Spirituality is a search for the sacred. Religiousness refers
to search for significance in ways related to the sacred” (Zinnbauer & Pargement, 2005: 36): This definition differentiates
religiousness and spirituality according to the place of the sacred as being either the means or the ends of the searching
process. Religiousness addresses a wider range of goals, needs, and values than spirituality does.
43
Zinnbauer’s definition of spirituality as “a personal or group search for the sacred” and religiousness as “a personal or
group search for the sacred that unfolds within a traditional sacred context” (Zinnbauer & Pargement, 2005:35) makes the
construct of spirituality wider than the construct of religion. In this understanding of the relationship between spirituality
and religiousness, the difference between the two constructs lies in the context. The context of spirituality may be outside
traditional and defined contexts.
44
Belzen (2005: 7) who views the relationship between religiosity and spirituality as two overlapping circles, contends that
spirituality is a narrower concept than religiosity, although its reference is broader than religiosity. Religion includes a form
of organization, hierarchy and so on, whereas spirituality need not. Spirituality refers to human conduct or acting, whereas
religiosity includes much more than conduct.
30
self-identification of a significant minority in western countries45 (Botvar, 2010; Hood, 2003).
Moreover it allows for identifying as both religious and spiritual (Henriksen, 2005). The illustration
of overlapping circles is, as I see it, in line with the larger trend in western society where not only are
religious blending and hybridization common, but also an intersection of religious and other (secular)
processes (Bender, Cadge, Levitt, & Smilde, 2013; Mc Guire, 2008), where “the religious has become
less obviously religious, the secular less obviously secular” (Heelas, 1998). Overlapping circles
further illustrate a more nuanced understanding of the relation between the concepts than the
polarization that has frequently occurred between religion and spirituality46 (Zinnbauer & Pargament,
2005).
Providing an all-inclusive definition of religion and spirituality both separately, and in relation to each
other, is difficult. Substantial definitions may be too restrictive and misleading because what counts
as religious or spiritual in one culture, or among some persons, may not be seen in that way in another
culture and among other persons. Functional definitions may be too wide, as a range of different
contents can serve the same existential function (Schnell, 2003: 102). In identifying with this
contextual and cultural perspective, I will to a large degree have to rely on what the participants say
that they consider as spiritual or religious (Belzen, 2009). However, that is not always explicit, and as
a researcher I have to derive analytical concepts that are not necessarily the same as the emic ones
used by the participants. The balance then is to find a circumscription that does not provide a too
narrow an understanding, but which gives some idea of what one is talking about (Belzen, 2009).
Thus, although the following definitions do not adequately capture the complexity,47 they are a way of
delineating and circumscribing what I will include as religious and spiritual meaning making:
Spirituality is defined as “the feelings, thoughts, experiences and behaviors that arise from a search for
the sacred,”48 and religiosity as the feelings, thoughts, experiences and behaviors that arise from a
search for the sacred that unfolds within a traditional sacred context” and/or to “search for
significance in ways related to the sacred”49 (Hill et al., 2000: 66; Zinnbauer & Pargament, 2005: 3536).
45
In a Norwegian study 12-13 % of the Norwegian population identify themselves as spiritual in the meaning of being
concerned with the supernatural or the sacred, but still express skepticism towards religion and religiosity (Botvar, 2010).
46
In its most extreme form the duality between religiosity and spirituality is expressed as the following: religiosity is
substantive, static, institutional, objective and belief-based, whereas spirituality is functional, dynamic, personal and
subjective (Zinnbauer & Pargement, 2005)
47
The concept spirituality is, for instance, ambiguous because it both includes aspects of traditional faith, critique of
religion and post religious beliefs (Westerink, 2013).
48
The term “search” is here used in the same way as Hill et al., and refers to “attempts to identify, articulate, maintain or
transform”. The term “sacred refers to a divine being, divine object, Ultimate reality or Ultimate Truth, as perceived by the
individual” (Hill, Pargament, Hood, McCullough, Swyers, Larson & Zinnbauer, 2000: 66).
49
That is: religiosity also comprises what may be non-sacred goals, such as identity, belongingness, meaning, health or
wellness in a context where the goal is to facilitate the search for the sacred (Hill et al, 2000: 66).
31
Regarding the secular orientations, there have been suggestions from the discipline of the psychology
of religion that spirituality should be defined as commitment to Transcendence (Belzen, 2005, 2009,
2010; Schnell, 2011) where Transcendence can be written with either upper or lower case, thus
including non-religious spirituality, or non-theistic spirituality (Westerink, 2012) as a horizontal
transcendence. Transcendence is then seen as “that which transcends human life and its particular
importance, and it is that which may give meaning to an individual life” (Belzen, 2005:7). However,
not everyone wants to acknowledge transcendence, even with a lower case “t”. In relation to the PDP
experience, although this can be seen as transcending ordinary life, it is not necessarily understood as a
commitment to transcendence. I thus find the concept’s secular meaning to be more open, and I use it
to denote non-religious and non-spiritual orientations. Secular meaning making, in the analysis, is
employed when meanings and interpretations are explicitly described as non- religious or nonspiritual by the participants, and also, more specifically, when investigating what this non-religious
secular meaning making is comprised of (for instance, secular cognitive psychological theories). As
already pointed out, the secular may be used in combination and hybridity with religious or spiritual
meanings.
Thus, in the analysis chapters, I will use the term worldview(ing) when referring to the overarching
and general unit of investigation, while the terms religious, spiritual and secular meaning making will
be used specifically where it is relevant to distinguish, or highlight, one or more of these orientations
in meaning making. In this study, it is not analytically important to differentiate between religiosity
and spirituality, and the terms will sometimes be used concurrently (when both orientations are
present, or when it is difficult to know which label to attach to a statement). However, one term will
be used specifically if it refers clearly to either the one or the other.
What must be underscored is that I am not studying religion, or spirituality, or secularity per se, but
religious, spiritual and secular meaning making as related to PDP experiences. As religion and
spirituality are multidimensional constructs, they cover more than the meaning making which is the
unit of analysis of this study, and they may also involve more than worldview(ing). They are,
however, also narrower constructs, as meaning making and worldview also include secular forms of
meaning.
32
1.3.5. Unit of analysis
In summary, I have clarified the unit of analysis of the study, which is the individual’s experience of
the PDP and related meaning making. A narrower and more theory-oriented unit of analysis would be
experiences of PDP and the related sense making and significance of grief and worldview. The
movement between the open and the narrow approach will be one of the dynamics in the analysis.
Having established the unit of analysis, formulated the research questions, and clarified the use of the
concepts, I will now turn to the study’s design.
Individual experiences of PDP and
the related sense making and
significance
Individual experiences of
PDP and the related sense
making and significance of
grief and worldview
Figure 1.3.5. Units of analysis
33
1.4.
Design
What is the best way to design a study that investigates the experiences and meaning making in PDP,
in a context where PDP is connected to strong evaluations, is mostly experienced in private, and may
occur in spontaneous, episodic incidents?
Because the aim of the study is to investigate meaning making and experiences when complex cultural
understandings are negotiated, a qualitative approach50 is a logical choice (Creswell, 2009). A
qualitative approach provides the opportunity to study a “web of relationships in which the bereaved is
involved, including that with the deceased” (Klass, 1996: 22). The literature on PDP has called for
qualitative approaches to the phenomenon (see chapter 2) and because PDP has not been extensively
explored, this study uses an open and explorative research design (Bryman, 2004: 23). Thus, my
approach is not to seek a correlation between PDP and grief- or worldview “outcomes” using preestablished closed variables. However, in an early phase of my research, I did consider using a mixed
methods approach, with a combination of intensive and extensive research strategies. A quantitative
survey could have made it possible to formulate a clearer generalization of the population that went
beyond the case studies (Riis, 2009). However, given the time limitations and my wish to do a
thorough qualitative study, I decided to restrict the methodology to a qualitative strategy.
A qualitative strategy allows different opportunities for data collection, but the character of the
phenomenon does leave out some possibilities. As previously discussed, the PDP experience may take
place only occasionally in episodic events, and previous research has shown that the timing may be
beyond the control of the experiencer (Steffen & Coyle, 2010). This—in addition to the subjective
character of the experience—makes observation practically and methodically difficult. Because the
research questions ask for a subjective point of view, and I want to study the experience through the
meaning that is imposed on it, the interview is an appropriate option. According to Kvale (1996:30),
“the purpose of the qualitative research interview is to obtain descriptions of the lived world of the
interviewees with respect to the interpretation of the meaning of the described phenomena.” I have
further opted for personal interviews, as opposed to focus group interviews, because people mostly
experience PDP in private, and to a large extent they do not know each other. Further, it would be
practically difficult to gather a group of people at the same time. Moreover, I chose personal
interviews because they have the potential to build trust and rapport. This is always important, but
even more so when the topic of investigation has been stigmatized. Other possibilities were to ask for
logs or to collect diaries, but I wanted to be able to ask follow-up questions and use situational
50
Even though the divide between qualitative and quantitative research is regarded by some authors as out of date
(Layder, 1998; Danermark, 2002), the concepts are still in use, and according to Bryman (2008), there is no sign that the
distinction has abated.
34
dynamics, which the personal interview makes possible. In order to gather data through the
interviews, I sampled 16 people who had had PDP experiences, using selection criteria and
recruitment procedures. I will return to the sampling process in section 4.2
Theoretically, the study is situated in the interpretive paradigm and further in hermeneutics and
phenomenology. As an overall research strategy and a specific strategy of analysis, I opted for the
interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). IPA was developed in the field of psychology in the
mid-1990s.51 However, in recent years it has been applied in other disciplines in the human, health,
and social sciences (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). The main focus of IPA is on exploring the
participant’s experience and meaning-making (Smith & Eathough, 2007). The approach is typically
used in research that concentrates on major life experiences. It is assumed that when people are
engaged in an experience of something major in their lives they begin to reflect on the significance of
what is happening. IPA aims to engage with these reflections. I chose IPA for several reasons: I want
to study experience and meaning making; IPA focuses on major life events, which to a large degree
corresponds to the phenomenon of the study52; and it is contextualized in psychology. Moreover, IPA
is concerned with an emphatic reading of the participant’s account, which I consider an ethical
approach to studying a phenomenon to which strong valuations and stigma are attached.
As I will discuss further in chapter 3, and in section 4.4.4, the design of the study includes
psychological theories, which are used to inform the analysis. That is: the theoretical connections are
built from a close reading of the material (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009). The main theories are the
Dialogical Self Theory and the Continuing Bonds Theory. As I have previously noted, the Dialogical
Self Theory conceptualizes meaning making as movement in space between different—sometimes
contrasting —I- positions, or voices, where other people—both living and dead—operate in the
intersection between perceptual and imaginal space (Hermans & Kempen, 1993). The Continuing
Bonds Theory relates the PDP experience and meaning making to grief and worldview. It focuses on
continued relations with the deceased as normal and potentially adaptive for the grief process,
particularly when integrated into a worldview (Klass, 2001).
Other theories could naturally have been chosen. Two obvious candidates would, for instance, have
been Object Relation theories53 and Kenneth Pargament’s theory of spiritual and religious coping
(Pargament, 1997, 2007). Object Relation theories, with their notion of other significant persons as
51
Its first real mark came with the publication of Jonathan Smith’s (1996) paper in Psychology and Health, which argued in
favor of an approach to psychological research that was able to capture both the experiential and the qualitative.
52
Although some see their experience as natural and ordinary, it is often classified as extraordinary and is often connected
to death of a loved one as a major life experience.
53
It could, for instance, be Object Relation theory in the variant of Winnicott (1953 ), Fairbarn (1952), or Rizzuto (1974,
1979)
35
“inner representations”, would have been useful in the conceptualization of the continued relationship
with deceased significant others. However, as I will elaborate in the theory chapter, Object Relation
theories are one of the bases of the Continuing Bonds Theory. As such, they are still present among
the theoretical concepts, although not elaborated as a main conceptual framework. Pargament’s theory
could have been a natural choice related to the research question on the significance of the PDP
experience. What made me, however, choose the two theories that I did, was their socio-cultural
orientation, which I think is beneficial when studying a phenomenon such as PDP, which is strongly
present in society with complex cultural interpretations. Moreover, I opted for Continuing Bonds
Theory because I wanted to focus on meaning making related to grief, in addition to religious and
spiritual meaning making.
Having briefly presented the choices concerning the components of the design, I will turn to the
coherence of the different components. The research design also considers the relations between the
elements, that is, the research paradigm, theories, research questions, and method of data collection. A
research design can be conceptualized as “the logical structure of the inquiry” (de Vaus, 2001: 9),
much like the architecture or composition of a building (Afdal, 2005). Figure 1.4 shows how the
different parts of the study cohere.
36
Research
paradigm
Hermeneutics and
phenomenology
Continuing
Bonds
theory
Dialogical
Self Theory
Research question:
What characterizes PDP
experiences, and how/what
do people make meaning of
their PDP experiences?
Material
Semi-structured
interviews with 16
people reporting PDP
experiences with a
Extant literature
on PDP, grief and
worldview
Figure 1.4. Design illustration
37
1.5.
Frame
1.5.1.
Academic placement: psychology of religion
The study is placed within the discipline of the psychology of religion. This makes it possible to
investigate in depth the individual, yet socio-culturally embedded, experiences of PDP. The
psychology of religion is usually described as a branch of psychology (Pargament, 1997), or as rooted
in psychology (Danbolt, 2013). However, from the inception of this discipline, the boundaries of the
psychology of religion have been difficult to draw in terms of defining what is included in the field
and delineating the object of study, namely religion (Wulff, 2010). In line with two psychologists of
religion, David Wulff and Jacob Belzen, I will define the psychology of religion as consisting of the
“systematic application of psychology’s methods and interpretive frameworks to the broad domain of
religion” (Wulff, 2010: 732), where “the aim and purpose is to use psychological instruments, like
theories, concepts, insights, methods and techniques, to analyze and understand religion” (Belzen,
2010:4).
The psychology of religion can be distinguished from pastoral psychology, which has another
purpose, namely to serve religious purposes and facilitate the aims of churches. The psychology of
religion does not aim to foster or combat religion, only to analyze and understand it (Belzen, 2010). It
has been important to free the psychology of religion from apologetic interests, particularly from
theology (Westerink, 2012). Hidden agendas still exist that are related to religious interests within
organizations, foundations, and individuals who are funding, guiding, or doing research (Belzen,
2010). However, liberating psychology of religion from religious interests does not mean that a study
in the psychology of religion is not relevant for religious studies and religious practice.
1.5.2.
Hermeneutical psychology of religion
As the previous discussion has pointed out, the discipline of psychology of religion is not unitary, but
has several branches. Some have even asked if there is a common understanding of its boundaries.
This plurality consists of epistemological positions, theoretical traditions, and methodical approaches
(Belzen, 2010). In this diverse situation, one can roughly distinguish between two methodological
mainstreams in psychology, which can also be found in the psychology of religion: the empirical
analytical approach and the hermeneutical approach (Belzen & Hood, 2006). Although it can be
argued that hermeneutical research can be empirical (Belzen, 2010), there are epistemological and
methodological differences between the two. This study can be placed within the hermeneutical
38
branch. It also includes theories of cultural psychology. The cultural hermeneutical position aims “to
study not only the isolated individual, but also the beliefs, values and rules that are prevalent in a
particular situation” (Belzen, 2010: 61). By positioning my study within the hermeneutical and
cultural branches of the psychology of religion, I am not only searching inside the human being to
investigate beliefs, feelings, reasoning, and behavior, but am also trying to understand how the specific
form of life in which the person is embedded constitutes and constructs feelings, thoughts, and
conduct. My focus is at the nexus of culture and the individual. I focus on culture as it is embedded in
the experience of PDP, and I view it through the individual. As I will discuss further in chapter 4, I
look for “the meaning for an individual person in a particular context” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin,
2009:195). Accordingly, when studying religious and spiritual meaning making, I am looking for
voices that refer to religion and spirituality in their sociocultural manifestations (e.g. religious
traditions, spiritual practices), and also to the “psychological dimension of the functions of religion in
people’s lives such as meaning making and coping with adversity” (Zock, 2013: 15).
The object of study, religion, is widely discussed by psychologists of religion, as I have reflected in
section 1.3.3. In recent years, the conceptual debate has centered not only on the use and
understanding of the concepts of religion and spirituality,54 but also on meaning making or existential
meaning making, vertical and horizontal transcendence, and theistic and non-theistic spiritualities as
alternative conceptualizations.
Broadening the scope to religious and spiritual and secular meaning making, one opens the study to
non-religious behavior and experience, such as atheistic meaning making, as part of the psychology of
religion. Maintaining this open scope corresponds with the approach of this study, which is that
different worldviews can play a part in the process of meaning making throughout and after a PDP
experience.
The present project discusses the relationships between grief, worldview (religious, spiritual, and
secular) and the experience of PDP. The experience of PDP is not a priori considered as religious or
spiritual. Whether the experience of PDP is perceived and interpreted as a religious or spiritual
experience, and whether the experience influences the participant’s religion or spirituality, are
considerations related to the interpretation of the particular individual, situated in his or her own
culture. As will be presented in the analysis chapters, secular interpretations are also found in the
interview data. The study is thus not situated within the psychology of religion and spirituality
because PDP is a religious or spiritual phenomenon, but because it asks how religious, spiritual and
54
For instance, when Division 36 of the American Psychological Association proposed to change the name of the division
from “psychology of religion” to “psychology of religion and spirituality”, the proposal was rejected. However, the American
Psychological Association launched a new journal in 2009 entitled “Psychology of Religion and Spirituality” (Belzen 2010:
55).
39
secular worldviews relate to the experience of PDP. To contextualize religion and spirituality in the
way I have presented above corresponds to the hermeneutical and cultural approach of psychology.
Religion is not absolute, but varies according to culture. What counts as religious in one culture may
not apply or even exist in another. In that respect I follow Belzen (2010:9) who contends that “it
would be far more adequate to state they have been doing research on this or that phenomenon from
this or that tradition on this or that location, than to claim to have been doing research on ‘religion.’”
The theories I use to understand the PDP experience and meaning making are from general
psychology.55 Yet the conceptual framework does not therefore reduce the unit of analysis only to
general psychological processes, in my case to grief, or theories of the self. The aim of this study is, in
line with an understanding in the psychology of religion, to find out what is specific about the
experience and meaning making of PDP, whether understood as religious, spiritual or secular, from a
psychological perspective. The hermeneutical tradition offers a chance to elaborate on the specifics
and particularities of the worldviews in use, thus contributing both to psychological knowledge, and to
knowledge about worldviews (Belzen & Hood, 2006).
1.5.3.
Hermeneutical psychology of religion, clinical psychology and psychopathology
Regarding the placement of this study within the hermeneutical and cultural psychology of religion, I
will provide some reflections on the approach used in this study in relation to psychopathology and
clinical psychology. As I will return to in the methods chapter, I have attempted to recruit a sample in
which the participants have not been patients in a mental hospital. By asking about that in a
preliminary telephone conversation, and by asking about their mental health in the interview, I have
tried to establish a non-clinical sample (see section 4.2). This does not mean that I am unaware of
similar or overlapping phenomena in a psychiatric context, and that there is no clear line between what
is diagnosed as pathological and what is not. As the literature review will show, several studies have
labelled PDP experiences as hallucinations,56 that is, as errors of perception that may be part of a
psychiatric diagnosis of schizophrenia. Furthermore, PDP experiences have been diagnosed as
“intrusion phenomena” related to posttraumatic stress disorder (American Psychiatric Association,
DSM 5, 2013: 271). They have also been considered a symptom of a “persistent complex
bereavement disorder” (American Psychiatric Association, DSM 5, 2013: 289). Sampling people who
55
Belzen (2010) uses Dialogical Self Theory as an example of a cultural approach to psychology, which the psychology of
religion would benefit from applying. He has also employed the theory in one of his own empirical studies.
56
“Hallucinations are perception-like experiences that occur without an external stimulus. They are vivid and clear, with
the full force and impact of normal perceptions, and not under voluntary control” (American Psychiatric Association, DSM 5,
2013: 87).
40
have not been in a mental hospital (according to their self-report) and asking about their mental health
in the interview does not, of course, guarantee that all the participants are on the “normal” side of the
diagnostic criteria. Neither does it guarantee that they are not in need of therapy. However, the
literature indicates that PDP experiences seem to occur in people who are not mentally ill (Klass &
Walter, 2001; Parker 2005), and that the experience itself is not pathological, although other factors
may play together with the PDP experience and create psychopathology. Both Dialogical Self Theory
and the Continuing Bonds Theory provide theoretical reflections to assist with an understanding of the
difference between pathological and non-pathological experiences, which I will elaborate on in chapter
3.
Establishing a “non-clinical sample” does not mean that the study is irrelevant in the practice of
clinical psychology, but I aim to investigate experience and meaning without using diagnostic criteria.
Psychiatric discourse often looks at the cause of the experience in order to investigate its meaning. I
instead will look for the meaning in the description of the experience, and the meaning making process
that takes place through the experience (Hayes, 2011; Leudar & Thomas, 2000).
41
1.6.
Composition of the thesis
In the last section of this introductory chapter, I provide the outline of the rest of the thesis.
As mentioned in a footnote in section 1.1, I have used the concept composition as the heading of
different parts of the thesis, as I do in this chapter. The term is taken from Hubert Hermans’
Dialogical Self Theory, and according to his view, it is a key metaphor for the understanding of the
self. The analogy is the act of a musical composer. According to Hermans and Kempen (1993: 96),
“The composer involves new music by letting himself be inspired by a vast array of sounds intonation
of voices, folk melodies, visual impressions, music from other composers, music from previous eras,
other styles etc.” In the process of composition, disparate elements are brought together as a whole.
The composer uses what he or she finds and makes it into a composition. As Hermans observed, the
relation between the composer and the music is no different from that between the writer and the book.
The writer—and the researcher—similarly compose his or her book in dialogue with other authors and
researchers and with ideas available in the culture he or she is embedded. Based on that dialogue the
researcher makes a structure and a composition.
Hence, here is the composition that comprises this thesis:
The thesis is divided into four main parts. Part I outlines the composition of the study, that is, the
framework and the design. I have already presented the introduction in chapter 1. In chapter 2 I
present relevant previous research. In chapter 3 I outline the theoretical framework that I will use in
the analysis of the material. That is: the Dialogical Self Theory and the Continuing Bonds Theory.
Chapter 4 is devoted to the methodological considerations. Together these chapters describe and
discuss the framework of the study.
Part II contains the analysis of the material. The analysis chapters start with a presentation of the
participants (chapter 5), where each participant is briefly described. This is followed by an analysis of
the perceptions of PDP (chapter 6), the meaning making of PDP (chapter 7), and meaning making
related to grief (chapter 8), and worldview (chapter 9). Part II ends with an analysis of the dynamics
between PDP experiences, grief and worldview (chapter 10). The main findings are summarized in
the end of the analysis part in chapter 11.
Part III, which is found in chapter 12, comprises a discussion in which the theories and the material
enter into a dialogue, with the aim of answering the research questions.
In the last part, Part IV, I discuss implications of the findings for professionals who encounter people
with PDP experiences.
42
Chapter 2: PREVIOUS RESEARCH—LACUNAS AND
BUILDING BLOCKS
In this chapter, I will present previous research on the phenomenon of PDP. The aim of the literature
review is three-fold: first, to outline the research in order to clarify from where my project departs,
second, to present findings and identify debates that will be used later in the analysis and discussion
sections (Part III) and, third, to highlight some lacunas in previous research, which point to where my
project can contribute.
Relevant literature was found by searching the following databases: Academic elite, Atlas, Debora,
Idunn, Psycharticles, Psychinfo, and Pubmed, and by carefully examining the reference lists of
relevant articles. Some of the most relevant studies, which were published after I started the project,
have been incorporated as the project progressed. It is not possible to present all publications on PDP
in this thesis, even though specific research on PDP is limited compared to other phenomena.
Although there is relatively limited number of research articles, the phenomenon of post death contact,
and more specifically PDP, yet sometimes termed differently, is studied in several disciplines, creating
a great diversity of perspectives, methodologies, and research foci (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). I have
chosen to present selected contributions from this broad field of research, but give more attention to
studies with a similar focus to my own project. The review starts with a presentation of two seminal
studies surveying the prevalence and social and medical correlates of PDP. I then move to a general
presentation of selected studies in different disciplines within social science and humanities. After
that, I move closer to my own project by focusing on research on PDP within psychology. Finally, I
sketch contributions to current debates mainly in grief research, which are debates I will enter into in
the discussion chapters in Part III of this thesis. Although I have put the different studies under certain
disciplines, this is not always completely accurate, as some of the studies are interdisciplinary research
that could be placed under different headings.
43
2.1. Research on post death presence within social science and humanities—
a general overview
2.1.1. Seminal studies of the prevalence and social and medical correlates of PDP experiences
In the 1970s, surveys mapping the prevalence of PDP and its correlational social and medical factors
appeared within mainstream science. One of the most cited and groundbreaking surveys was
published in the British Medical Journal in 1971. The study was conducted by Rees (1971, 2001) in
Wales, where he set out to interview virtually all the widows and widowers in his district searching for
reactions to bereavement. In this survey 46% of the 293 participating widows and widowers reported
extraordinary experiences related to bereavement, the most frequent one (39%) was “feeling a
presence” (Rees, 2001: 267). In addition to the prevalence in the bereaved population, Rees (1971)
found that the feeling of presence experience occurred with equal frequency irrespective of gender,
social group, religious practices, geographical location, living circumstances, or social support, and
irrespective of the type of loss. However, the experience was found to be more frequent among
younger widows, which was later confirmed in other studies (Dateson & Marwit, 1997; Simon-Buller,
Christopherson & Jones, 1988–89). Rees (1971) found a positive association between a sense of
presence experience and length and happiness of marriage, as well as parenthood. He also found more
frequent experiences among those with higher education, a finding which has been contradicted by
some studies from the U.S. (Dateson & Marwit, 1997; Kalish & Reynolds, 1973; Klugman, 2006) but
confirmed by another U.S. based study (Olson, Suddeth, Peterson & Engelhoff, 1985).57 Moreover,
there were a positive correlation between incidences of sense of presence and extrovert personality
type. Particularly relevant for my present study is that, although the experience was found to occur in
the first years of bereavement, it sometimes happened decades after the loss. Rees (1971) examined
the experience in relation to factors associated with grief, and, as a physician, he included clinical
medical factors. I will discuss these findings in the presentation of grief research in section 2.3.;
however, I can summarize here that the sense of presence was not correlated with depression or
socially isolation. On the contrary, the incidences of the experiences were associated with fewer sleep
disturbances, reduced loss of appetite, and reduced loss of weight, although those who “hallucinated”
thought about and missed the deceased more than those who had not “hallucinated” (Rees, 1971,
2001). With one exception, there was no evidence to suggest that anyone had deliberately cultivated
the image of the deceased or sought an encounter with the dead person through, for instance,
spiritualist rituals (Rees, 2001).
57
In contrast to other U.S. based surveys, Olson et al. (1985) used an adapted version of Rees’ (1971) design, which may
count for the findings confirming Rees’ results. It also been discussed whether the discrepancy has to do with contextual
differences between the U.K. and the U.S. regarding religion, as the religiosity level appears to be higher in those with lower
education in the U.S. (Klugman, 2006; Steffen & Coyle, 2012).
44
Rees’ (1971) work seems to have inspired social scientists of the Western world. In the years to
follow, articles appeared in which incidences of PDP experiences (sense of presence and sensory
experiences) were confirmed to be approximately 40–50% of the bereaved population in different
countries. U.S. studies by Kalish and Reynolds (1973), examining PDP experiences in cross ethnic
contexts, and Olsen et al. (1985), studying widowed residents in nursing homes, confirmed similar
pictures to that of Rees (2001).58 Representative studies surveying the general population, not only
newly bereaved, were also undertaken. An U.S. study by Greeley (1987, 1989) found that 27%, in
1976, and 41%, in 1987, responded affirmatively to the question, “Have you ever felt that you were
really in touch with someone who had died?” The same item was included in the European Human
Values Studies, which showed that 25% of the respondents reported having felt contact with the dead
(Haraldsson, 1985, Haraldsson & Houtkooper, 1991).
What these studies documented, and what was groundbreaking at that time, was how common such
experiences are and that people who experience PDP are not necessary mentally ill or unhealthy. On
the contrary, the studies indicated that people who have bonded deeply with a loved one are most
likely to sense contact with that deceased after death (Rees, 1971, 2001).
Another study which is often cited and which has inspired the later continuing bonds paradigm59, is
presented in the article, “Mourning in Japan,” in the American Journal of Psychiatry (Yamamoto,
Okonogi, Iwasaki, & Yoshimura, 1969). This article reports on the experiences of 30 Tokyo widows
whose husbands had recently died in a car accident. In the study as much as 90% of them had
experienced sense of presence of their partners afterwards. The findings are discussed in relation to
religiousness of Buddhism and Shintoism, indicating that cultural sanctions give higher incidences of
sense of presence experiences. Similar to the Western studies, the widows were found to have healthy
lives (Yamamoto et al., 1969), contributing to what has become common ground in the research of
sense of presence that those experiences are normal and not necessarily associated with pathology.
I will continue the discussion of PDP and bereavement in section 10.3. The following section presents
some studies related to PDP and religion from the viewpoint of sociology of religion and from
religious and cultural studies. As this research is particularly related to the context of PDP in my
study, I have put weight on Norwegian and Nordic contributions.
58
In Kalish and Reynold’s (1973) study, 44% of the 434 participants reported encounters with the dead, more Mexican
Americans than Japanese and White Americans. In the study of Olsen et al. (1985), 61% of the 46 widows reported sense of
presence experiences.
59
See for instance Klass (2006a, 2006b, 1999), Silverman& Klass (1996).
45
2.1.2. Sociological and anthropological studies
Concerning the debate surrounding the rise of new spirituality (Heelas & Woodhead, 2005) and the
conceptual debate on new religiosity, spirituality, holistic spirituality, alternative religiosity, New Age
etc., research trying to map the religious landscape has appeared. Contact with the dead is not usually
the only central theme in those studies; yet, interesting for this thesis is the placement of the
phenomenon within the larger religious and spiritual landscape. For instance, did the Norwegian
researcher Botvar (2009) in his doctoral thesis distinguish two kinds of alternative religiosity in
Norway; New Age and spirituality. As I discussed in the Introduction in section 1.2, Botvar
considered New Age as the phenomenon and therapy oriented religiosity, which emerged in the 1980s
and 1990s with its origin in the counterculture in the 1970s. Spirituality, on the other hand, was
characterized by searching for a richer spiritual life, deeper meaning, values, and strong emotional
experiences. Contact with the dead was, in Botvar’s (2009) study, placed within the New Age
category. Botvar (2009) further characterized the New Age category as having some similar features
to folk religiosity or folk belief,60 which again carry some fatalistic tendencies. As I analyze the
meaning making of the experiences of contact with the dead, or more precisely PDP, the folk religious
and New Age associations to the phenomenon give information about where the PDP perceivers may
find their interpretive resources. However, as the sampling in the present study shows (see section
4.2), I have taken a grip on the experience, which goes beyond the New Age category and, thus, the
meaning making will draw on a wider range of cultural resources. Botvar’s (2009) research referred to
contact with the dead as a belief rather than an experience, which is a different emphasis to the one
presented in this thesis. He neither distinguished between contact with the deceased through a
medium or as a “direct” PDP experience. Botvar had a different aim to mine, namely to study the two
forms of alternative religiosity in relation to political preference and social involvement.
The British sociologist Tony Walter, whom I will come back to in the theory chapter (section 3.2), has
categorized different ways of communicating with the dead through his studies (Walter, 2009), in
which sense of presence is one form. Part of his categorization is used in my study in section 1.2.2.
Walter (2007) also examined the cultural legitimation of the different expressions of communicating
with the dead. One of his findings is that the sense of presence seems to be gaining measure of
legitimacy in recent years. Walter (2007) further conducted field studies within a spiritualistic
congregation and, as presented in 1.2.2, he conceived spiritualism as one end of a continuum from the
unbidden experiences to the deliberate practices. Consultations with mediums were, in Walter’s
(2007) study, found as predominantly positive by the receivers, and he further found the messages they
60
Although, concerning the history of ideas, folk religiosity and New Age have different origins.
46
received mostly innocuous. In his 2007- article the findings were discussed within a larger frame
against critics of spiritualism, e.g., the Protestant church. In line with larger trends in Western society,
Walter (2007) suggested that although discouraged by the Church and science, spiritualism is more
legitimized (the same trend that he finds for sense of presence experiences). The touchstone now, he
claimed, is not so much externalized authority, whether of the Bible or science, but of personal
experience. Walter (2009) also found that the Western form of contacting the dead has a more
distinctly progressive character than for instance the African ancestor veneration, which reflects
familial authority relations and has a stronger connection to fear.
Anthropological research has studied rituals for ancestor veneration and continuing relationships with
the dead in different cultures.61 Relating to the cultural character of PDP experiences are McClenon’s
(1990) often cited surveys of anomalous experiences among Chinese and Americans, of which contact
with the dead is one part. McClenon (1990, 1993) found no evidence to support that respondent’s
religiosity and scientific training predict the frequency of anomalous experiences. He suggested then
an experiential rather than a cultural source hypothesis. This follows an alternative direction to the
discussion resulting from the study of Yamamoto et al. (1969) presented above.
2.1.3. Religious and cultural studies
Although with a slightly different approach and object of study, I will present some Norwegian
contributions from religious and cultural studies.
From religious science, Kalvig’s (2012, 2013) research on “death contact and memory of the dead”
examined spiritistic practices through religious and secular séances, cleaning of haunted houses,
practices via the Internet, and through popular culture such as films and books. The research
contributed with a broad focus on spiritism and gave an understanding of the growing practice of
mediumship and its function, to which the participants in my present study relate. It further showed
how spiritistic expressions appear in interaction with other spiritual and religious and secular practices.
Kalvig (2012: 129) employed the concept of memory work of the dead, which has been used in
Norwegian culture since the time of the norse. Today memory work of the dead is found in spiritistic
séances and, from this perspective, Kalvig gives historical continuity to the contemporary practice. As
I focus on “direct” experiences, which do not necessarily fall within spiritism, and, as my study draws
on psychological theories, it has a different approach. However, as some of the participants also use
the available mediums, Kalvig’s research is relevant.
61
For instance Guoqing (2005) on the ancestors drawing power in Han society in China and Pérez (2011) on spiritist
mediumship and rituals among Black North American practitioners of Afro Cuban religions.
47
Mehren's (1999, 2011) study of spiritism is similarly relevant through its perspectives to cultural and
religious resources, which are available in the sense making of PDP experiences; however, as
Mehren’s approach is historical and focuses on spiritism, yet with discussions of spiritism’s relation to
new spirituality, her approach and object of study differs from mine. Mehren’s (1999) historical
analysis shows that there is a line from early twentieth century spiritism, with its democratic form of
spirituality in which every person has access to a spiritual truth and with many women involved, to the
contemporary new spirituality which encompass some of the same features.
Another contribution from religious and cultural science comes from Alver, Gilhus, Mikaelsson, and
Selberg (1999). In Alver et al.’s conceptualization of the magic human being, the relation to a world
of the spirits, also dead relatives, is present. Alver et al. (1999) did not study contact with the dead
specifically in the variant of PDP, as I have delineated. However, their research, which described
individuals as multireligious actors and religion as spread thinly, and their view of the intertwinement
of folk religion, alternative, and Christian beliefs gives valuable insight into the experiences and
understanding of PDP experiences, which my study focuses on.
Naturally, as the phenomenon of contact with the deceased is extensively present in the media, some
studies have focused on the presentation of post death contact by different media. Døving and Kraft
(2013) analyzed the news media debate in Norway after Princess Märtha Louise’s utterance about the
possibility of contacting the dead in 2010 (see section 1.2). After analyzing the different critical
contributions, Døving and Kraft reflected on why the reactions to the utterance were so predominantly
negative, and suggested that in the case of the representatives from the Church it could have to do with
death being a churchly terrain, and when contact with the dead was appearing outside Church it was
harder to accept. According to Døving and Kraft (2013) it could also have to do with a practice that
goes into spiritism, and thus is contrary to Christian teaching. The attitude from the Church towards
the phenomenon post death contact is interesting in my study related to the participant’s negotiation of
meaning through their experiences.
In the discipline of folklore, the belief in ghosts and stories of ghosts are studied from historical and
cultural perspectives as stories, songs, myths, beliefs, and practices. For example, are Finuance (1996)
classical text, “Ghosts, Appearances of the dead and cultural transformation” informative. Finuance
(1996) attempted to describe the European history of ghosts and concluded that each epoch perceived
the characteristics of ghosts according to specific sets of expectations at that time. For instance, in the
Middle Ages, there were descriptions of woeful spirits bearing the marks of purgatorial torments,
whereas nineteenth century spiritualist communications sensory spirit manifestations were thought to
demonstrate the immortality of the soul in a way that met the demands of empiricism (Finuance,
1996). Taking this historical perspective further, Kwilecki (2009) characterized the twentieth and
48
twenty-first century experiences of after death communication as reflecting the spiritual marketplace,
moving the focus to health and healing (Kwilecki, 2009).
From a historical review of research and literature on after death communication in American culture,
Kwilecki (2009) delineated contemporary after death communication from poltergeists and spirits
transmitted through psychics and Ouija boards, and categorized it as direct and spontaneous. This
form of after death communication, which is largely similar to my concept of PDP, has according to
Kwliecki (2009) some characteristics particular to the twenty-first century. The two most prominent
qualities are the recognizable personal identity and the ghost’s improved health and character.
Unhappy ghosts are exceptions. The “improved ghosts” are also often “repentant ghosts,” forgiving
the living for wrongdoings in life. They have a progressive character, and Kwilecki (2009) understood
the messages from these after death communication- ghosts as bereavement therapy and as revelations
that provide healing and offer disclosures of the deeper hidden conditions of human existence.
Kwilecki (2009) argued that these characteristics represent two powerful industries in the U.S., namely
mental health and spirituality. Despite limited data in the literature, Kwilecki (2009) suggested two
possible patterns of after death communication: It (1) either fails to change a secular mindset or (2)
reinforces a broader, available faith perspective, usually the individual’s religious preference prior to
the experience. These findings are interesting in relation to my present study, as I analyze both
meaning making of grief and worldview and particularly look into how worldview is changing through
a PDP experience.
Relevant to my present study, is the folklorist G. Bennet, who has studied ghosts and death beliefs,
and relates them to processes of grief. In one of her studies with the psychologist K.M. Bennet (2000),
they draw on interviews conducted with 19 widows in Leicester, U.K., and, on a study from
Manchester 15 years earlier. Bennet and Bennet (2000) examined the role of informal storytelling
and personal experience in the formation and expression of belief. As in my present study, the
phenomenology of the experiences was analyzed, and they found that among the Leicester widows,
the experiences ranged from an ineffable feeling that the deceased “was there” to clear sensory
experiences. Another finding in this study was that the PDP experiences were not restricted to the
early months of bereavement, neither to any particular period. Consequently Bennet and Bennet
(2000) suggested that PDP experiences might remain vivid for as many as 20 years. Further, the
researchers found that the bereaved utilize two rival discourses in their interpretation of their
experiences, one materialist and one supernaturalist. The use of the two discourses alternates, even
from sentence to sentence, within the same conversation. The researchers suggested that this may be
partly because the interviewees hid their real view for fear of ridicule and, thus, added some
materialistic explanations to compensate (Bennet & Bennet, 2000). It is important to have this last
49
finding in mind when analyzing my interviews, as utterances may be chosen as “facework” towards
the researcher.
One study close to mine is Henriksen and Pabst’s (2013) qualitative research on paranormal
experiences and traditional beliefs in Norway. The interview-sample in this study consisted of people
with a relationship to traditional belief, which is mainly Christian. The researchers investigated how
paranormal experiences are negotiated, which, to some extent, are controversial in their religious
framework, and how the gap between dogmas and experiences can be interpreted in the philosophy of
religion, theology, and religious studies. The scope of the research is paranormal experiences in
general, and PDP experiences fill only one of the chapters. In terms of focus, my study is both wider,
in the sense that I include a larger variety of worldviews, not only people who define themselves as
Christians, and narrower, in the sense that I concentrate on people with PDP experiences only. The
analysis and theoretical framework have several overlapping perspectives, but a major difference is
that I focus on psychological theories in the analysis and interpretation, whereas Henriksen and Pabst
(2013) relate their research to a wider interdisciplinary field. However, I will discuss some of
Henriksen and Pabst’s findings in the analysis (section 7.1.8.). One of their major findings is that the
experiences are mostly unbidden or out of the perceiver’s control. Another finding is that Christian
religious worldview may provide a framework for interpreting the experience, and, as such, the PDP
experience strengthens the perceiver’s Christian faith. However, as the experiencers sometimes meet
resistance in the encounter with a Christian worldview, because of the discouragement of the
experience in the protestant tradition, the perceivers may also find alternative interpretive resources to
their experience. Yet, their material also showed that the border between different religious resources
is blurred. Henriksen and Pabst (2013: 14) call the attitude towards paranormal experiences in some
academic and church religious milieus “repressive orthodoxy” pointing at the strong discouragement
towards those kinds of experiences and calling for another response.
2.1.4. Studies in theology and spirituality
Within theology, one can find publications that discuss the relation between Christianity and African
ancestor veneration (Amanze, 2003; Mdende, 2005) and eastern ancestor rituals (Samuel, 2005).
More relevant to my present study are some publications on Protestant Christianity and Spiritualism
(Sundermeier, 2004; Wagner-Rau, 2004; Whöhle, 2004). In her article, Wagner-Rau (2004) not only
discussed the different beliefs in relation to each other, but she also considered experiences of PDP as
a grief response and provided a desiderata for spiritual care. Drawing on case examples of people with
PDP experiences and on Bowlby’s (1980) attachment theoretical account of the early “searching
phase” of bereavement, she pointed to the necessity of letting the PDP perceiver talk freely about his
50
or her experiences to the spiritual counselor. She argued that these experiences are protected by God
and, thus, do not need to be feared. Wagner-Rau (2004) also pointed to Christian rituals, which have
the potential to gradually give the dead another place in the life of the living than they had before
death. However, these articles, which are part of a series published by the Lutheran World Federation,
are not empirical investigations into the experiences of PDP, as is my present study. In contrast to
Wagner-Rau (2004), I also draw on a newer grief paradigm in the approach to the experiences.
In Norway, the theologian Romarheim has written several contributions pointing at the widespread
interest in contact with the dead. As presented in the introduction, he has conducted research into
weekly magazines to analyze the content and frequency of new spirituality and has found that ghosts
and death contact is extensively present (Romarheim, 2004a, 2004b, 2008), although it has declined in
the last year (Romarheim, 2014). Romarheim (2007) asked for further development of a theology of
ghosts, acknowledging the need in theology for further reflection on the phenomenon.
In the interdisciplinary study of spirituality is the phenomenon of contact with the dead treated as part
of extraordinary experiences, or as human exceptional experiences, which is a term used for
experiences with the potential to promote transformative change in the experiencer, as well as
promoting health and well-being (Braud, 2012). One well known contributor is White (1997), who
made taxonomy of different exceptional human experiences where “unusual death related
experiences” is one category (White & Brown, 1998). Spirituality is also now coming in as part of
grief and trauma research, conceptualizing PDP experiences as spiritual experiences or post-traumatic
growth (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). I will return to this perspective in the review of grief research section
2.3.).
51
2.2. Research on post death presence within psychology and psychiatry
2.2.1. Studies in general psychology and in parapsychology
Few studies on extraordinary experiences exist within current Western mainstream psychology (Hood,
2005; Cardeña, Lynn, & Krippner, 2000). By the time of the onset of psychology as a discipline in the
last part of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century; however, the situation
was different. At that time, discussions around the possibility and quality of scientific study of
extraordinary experiences and, particularly, experiences of contact with the dead related to
spiritualism, was common and central.62 Leading psychologists such as C.G. Jung and W. James
participated in the debate and contributed with studies and theory building of extraordinary
phenomena (Teigen, 2004). James’ phenomenological study of different extraordinary experiences is
still relevant. In his seminal work “Varieties of Religious Experiences,” James (1902/2010: 49)
presented precise descriptions of sense of presence experiences, which I will come back to in the
analysis (section 6.1.10).
Jung’s theoretical concepts of archetypes and the collective unconscious is used in an ongoing
Swedish doctoral study of “place-bound entity continuity” (which is similar to the phenomenon of
haunted houses) by Duppils. The study is based on Duppils’ (2010) master’s thesis in which she
investigated experiences of “place bound entity continuity” in existing literature, using theories of
Jung’s psychology and parapsychology. Duppils situates the study interdisciplinary between religious
studies and psychology of religion. As reflected in section 1.3, my phenomenon of study can be
distinguished from haunted houses. Further, I use a different theoretical framework from Duppils’
(2010), and I focus more on the meaning making process of the phenomenon and relate the
experiences to grief. Duppils (2010) understood the phenomenon of place bound entities as a form of
animism, suggesting that the experience could be explained by the percipients psychic material, which
is reflected in the atmosphere and expressed as psychic manifestation in the form of entity
experiences.
The phenomena of PDP have certainly been studied within parapsychology, appearing in journals as
Journal of Parapsychology and Journal of the Society of Psychical Research from the time of the
onset of the new psychology at the end of the nineteenth century to the present. However, today
parapsychology is not generally accepted within the discipline of psychology (Passer & Smith, 2011).
The skepticism is based on the view that parapsychological experiences are explained by paranormal
62
One of the founders of the new scientific psychology W. Wundt was critically engaged in the debate around spiritism and
contested against the phenomenon, which he characterized as a fraud, and scientific studies of spiritistic experiences,
which he considered less critical (Teigen, 2004).
52
phenomena63 as, for instance, telepathy and clairvoyance, thus indicating that paranormal phenomena
do exist. Sceptics also criticize parapsychologists claim to use scientific methods to make systematic
explorations of various possible bases of experiential reports, which according to the skeptics is
methodologically problematic (Passer & Smith, 2011). However, central researchers within
parapsychology currently hold the view that there is no presumption of the existence of the
paranormal. Paranormal experiences are the appearance of the paranormal, and whether paranormality
exists is a hypothesis and question of investigation. Investigating the bases of parapsychological
phenomena is not the approach in my study. However, parapsychology also has a phenomenological
domain of research and conducts surveys into the prevalence of the different parapsychological
experiences where PDP experiences are one of several topics. Sensory PDP perceptions are often
conceptualized as apparitions or as postmortem apparitional experiences (Irwin & Watts, 2007). In
my study, the phenomenological and descriptive research gives a valuable contribution to differentiate
PDP perceptions from, for instance, poltergeist phenomena and ghost phenomena.
Professor in parapsychology in Reykjavik, Iceland, Haraldsson (2009, 2011), has contributed with
quantitative surveys mapping the prevalence of post death encounters (see section 2.1.1.). In a study
of Icelanders reporting personal encounters with the dead, Haraldsson (2009) found that, from a
sample of 337, 90% reported sensory experiences of a deceased person. Of those, 69% were visual,
28% auditory, 13% tactile, and 4% olfactory. Apparitions of those who died violently were more
prominent than in cases of natural death. In the same study Haraldsson also found some collective
cases in which the apparition was perceived by more than one person. As a parapsychologist he
discussed the hypothesis of survival pointing to his findings of collective cases and in cases where the
deceased person unknown to the experiencer at the time of the experience appeared to convey some
sort of correct information that the living did not previously know. This is a different perspective from
my study. However, the examination of perceptual modalities of the post death encounters is relevant
to my study when exploring the characteristics of the PDP experience. In contrast to my study,
Haraldsson’s (2009) sample included contact with strangers and crisis apparitions, which are
experiences that occurred 12 hours before or after a person’s death (Irwin & Watts, 2007).
Most of the studies of PDP within the discipline of psychology are in the context of bereavement
research. I will return to those studies in section 2.3. Now I will continue the presentation of
psychological research by providing some selected studies from the psychiatric context.
63
That is: Psi phenomena as extrasensory experiences (clairvoyance, clairaudience, precognition, retrocognition, telepathy)
and psychokinesis (mind over matter) (Irwin & Watts, 2007).
53
2.2.2. Studies within a psychiatric context
Although few studies on extraordinary experiences exist within general psychology, visions and
auditions of the dead in a psychiatric context, termed hallucinations, have been subject to research.
It is now quite a robust finding that PDP experience is found to occur both in psychiatric and nonpsychiatric populations (Bentall, 2000; Steffen & Coyle, 2012). The debate in the psychiatric
paradigm centers around whether a certain experience is a sign of psychopathology and is part of a
diagnosis of, for instance, schizophrenia or a post- traumatic stress disorder, or whether it is best
described as a non-pathological experience, which can be understood as a spiritual experience.
One of the most comprehensive surveys of hallucinations in the general population to date is
conducted by Tien (1991). A total of 18,572 people were assessed and 15,258 reassessed one year
later. Tien’s (1991) study, together with other similar studies (e.g., Jablensky, 1995) found that a
substantial minority of the population experiences frank hallucinations at some point in their lives.
They further suggest that for every person who receives a diagnosis of schizophrenia, approximately
10 people experience hallucinations without receiving the diagnosis (Bentall, 2000).
Within the context of bereavement, although naming the experiences hallucinations, it is widely
recognized that the PDP experiences or hallucinations can be normal and do not warrant clinical
interventions (Pierre, 2010). However, prolonged grief or “persistent complex bereavement disorder”
may also be the case (American Psychiatric Association, DSM 5, 2013: 289). Further, evidence
suggests that hearing voices is strongly associated with significant life events, most pertinently of
bereavement (Rees, 1971), but also abuse and a variety of other emotional traumas (Pierre, 2010).
However, hearing voices is also common in people free from abuse and traumas (Leudar & Thomas,
2000).
In the study of auditory hallucinations, two models have been classified, broadly named as the
“lumping” and “splitting” models (Pierre, 2010). According to the lumping model, hearing voices and
auditory hallucinations are the same experience. The experience is found among individuals with no
mental illness, nonpsychotic disorders, or psychotic disorders, and, thus, they have little diagnostic
specificity. Other variables have to be taken into account to discern psychopathology, for instance,
frequency, preoccupations, insight, control, and perceived omnipotence. The splitting model posits
that auditory hallucinations may be spectrum entities, for instance, in which erroneous source
attribution is at one end of the spectrum, and different experiences with distinct pathophysiologies at
the other (Pierre, 2010).
As presented in section 1.5, I have attempted to study a non-clinical or non-patient sample. As a
phenomenological and hermeneutical study, I am not basing the research on a medical model. The
54
main point is not to study different diagnoses. However, as I am discussing the medical model of
grief, knowledge of research within the medical model is relevant to the present study.
2.3.
Bereavement research and post death presence
There are several studies focusing on PDP experiences in a bereavement research context.64 Recent
bereavement research is largely related to the new research paradigm in grief research; the continuing
bonds paradigm. In this paradigm, PDP is considered one of several continuing bonds expressions.
Yet, PDP experiences are also referred to within the older grief work model, and in research drawing
on both of the paradigms. A more thorough presentation of these theoretical perspectives will be
provided in the theory chapter (section 3.2.). Here, I will outline some of the research findings in the
framework of bereavement research. I will divide the following review into four parts: First,
quantitative adjustment studies measuring PDP related to grief “outcome” often using a standardized
test of grief symptoms. Related to that, I will present the meaning making approach, which is now
central to grief research, and focus on studies that include PDP experiences. In particular, I will
highlight some recent studies focusing on differentiation of continuing bonds and its impact on grief
accommodation. The last part presents qualitative studies focusing on the phenomenology and
meaning making of the PDP experience and its relatedness to grief accommodation, and to personal
and spiritual growth. The most relevant studies will be given more attention.
2.3.1.
Quantitative adjustment to bereavement studies
The adjustment to bereavement research is looking at how continuing bonds with the dead can help or
hinder adjustment to bereavement, but continuing bonds are not always specified to PDP. In those
studies, continuing bonds can, for example, mean memories of the dead or keeping the deceased’s
possessions, which are not necessarily sensory or quasi sensory perceptions, as is the case in PDP
experiences. If they are central to the debate, I will refer to some general continuing bonds studies, but
primarily, I will discuss the most relevant studies that refer to PDP (or other conceptualizations
referring to the phenomenon).
64
Steffen and Coyle (2012) have made an excellent review of literature on PDP experiences in bereavement research:
“Sense of presence experiences in bereavement and their relationship to mental health: A critical examination of a
continuing controversy,” which I will partly draw on in the following chapter.
55
As an aside, the term adjustment is in line with more recent literature (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). The
formerly used bereavement outcome is now less frequently used, possibly because there is a growing
consensus to see the grief process as a continuing process (Walter, 1997). The terms outcome,
recovery, and resolution are giving way to terms such as adjustment, accommodation, and
adaptiveness. The latter is used within the attachment literature, giving rise to definitions of adaptive
versus maladaptive forms of grieving (Field & Filanosky, 2010).
Addressing the question of adjustment to bereavement, what has the research found so far? Generally
speaking, some correlational studies suggest that people often consider PDP experience as emotionally
positive and beneficial, but having the experience is not necessarily indicative of better bereavement
adjustment, as it is defined and measured clinically (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). The results are not
conclusive, but they tend to show a concurrence of sense of presence experiences and increased grief
symptoms. For example, Simon-Buller et al. (1988 - 89) found a positive association between sensing
the presence of the deceased and increased anxiety, worry, and feelings of worthlessness. Grimby
(1998) suggested that the experience could be associated with more frequent episodes of crying,
memory disturbances, and feelings of loneliness. Dateson and Marwit (1997) concluded that
perceivers have increased scores for neuroticism (and extraversion). Field and Filanosky (2010) found
that distinctly sensory experiences of the deceased are associated with two risk factors for complicated
grief: violent death and responsibility for the death. Lindstrøm (1995), a Norwegian contribution to
this research field, observed that more intense experiences, whether positive or negative, for the
perceiver were linked to poorer outcomes.
However, other findings point toward positive clinical correlations such as Rees’ (1971, 2001) studies,
which were presented earlier (section 2.1). Rees (1971) found that PDP phenomena were associated
with positive clinical conditions such as fewer sleep problems and reduced loss of appetite and weight,
and no association with depression, although PDP experiences were also associated with a higher rate
of preoccupation with the deceased and with more reports of missing the deceased loved one. Krause
(2011) and Krause and Bastida (2012) found that PDP experiences reduced death anxiety.
As pointed out by Bolen, Stroebe, Shut, and Zijerveld (2006), there may be different interpretations of
the correlational results. The concurrence of manifestations of continuing bonds and grief symptoms
may reflect a causal relationship where continuing bonds cause persisting grief symptoms. Yet, other
interpretations are plausible. The reverse may also be the case. It is possible that intense grief (caused
by, for instance violent loss) strengthens the continuing bonds through an inclination to cling to the
lost person. It is even possible that both bonds and grief are caused by a third factor such as insecure
attachment. Another factor of debate, and which some researchers now are investigating, is the
possibility of an overlap between measures of continuing bonds, on the one hand, and measures of
56
grief on the other. Continuing bonds may be better conceptualized as a part of grief rather than a
phenomenon that causes, or is caused by, grief (Schut, Stroebe, Boelen, & Zijerveled, 2006).
In summary, researchers have recently started to empirically investigate the role of continuing bonds
in recovery or adjustment from loss (Schut, Stroebe, Boelen, & Zijerveled, 2006). It remains unclear
whether and how continuing ties with the lost person either facilitates or interferes with adjustment
after bereavement. Although some cross-sectional evidence exists for an association between
continuing bonds and difficulties with recovery from loss (Field & Friedrichs, 2004; Field, Gal-Oz, &
Bonanno, 2003), these findings are open to alternative interpretations, while other findings point to the
opposite conclusion.
2.3.2.
Differentiation of continuing bonds in adjustment
Since the concept of continuing bonds can include different kinds of experiences, attempts have been
made to distinguish between different forms of continuing bonds expressions. For example, Field,
Nichols, Holen, and Horowitz (1999) identified four core items of continuing bonds, of which “sense
of presence” was one. The other items related to the use of the deceased’s possessions, and to
maintain a connection through recovering memories. Field et al.’s (1999) findings, concerning
adjustment to bereavement, showed that the possessions—i.e. seeking comfort through contact with
the deceased’s belongings—were predictive of less of a decrease of grief symptoms over time. The
study used a longitudinal design. Field and Filanosky (2010) later distinguished between internalized
and externalized continuing bonds expressions. Externalized expressions are sensory perceptions in
which the deceased is experienced as an external presence (expressed through items such as, “I saw
him right before me,” “I actually felt the deceased’s touch”). PDP experiences belong to this
externalized expression. Internalized experiences are according to Field and Filanosky more memorylike continuing bonds expressions. Field and Filanosky (2010) found that external PDP experiences
were associated with risk factors for complicated or prolonged grief, while internal PDP experiences
were associated with personal growth, but also with complicated grief.
Notably, these adaptiveness studies on different and specified continuing bonds expressions have
brought some inconclusive results (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). For example, Field et al. (1999) found
that, whereas finding comfort through possessions of the deceased was associated with greater
bereavement related distress over time, sense of presence experiences were not. In a longitudinal
study, Field et al. (2003) found that the type of continuing bonds expression mattered early in
bereavement, but five years post loss continuing bonds was associated with greater bereavement
57
related distress independent of type of expression.65 In a newer study, Field and Filanoski (2010)
found that time was not an important factor.
The Norwegian study by Lindstrøm (1995) also specified and differentiated between experiences of
continuing bonds. Lindstrøm (1995) delimited her study to “sense of presence” experiences, and
conducted a longitudinal survey with 39 widows. The aim was to investigate sense of presence
experiences (here used as both sensory and non-sensory experiences) and psychological outcome
parameters. In Lindstrøm’s (1995) study, 75% of the widows had sense of presence experiences,
suggesting that extreme reaction/intensity of sense of presence was associated with poorer outcome—
whether positive or negative. “Extremely positive” sense of presence was associated with greater
distress, “extremely negative” responses led to avoidance behaviors.
As reflected above, “It is still unclear if and how continuing ties with the lost person either facilitates
or interferes with adjustment after bereavement” (Boelen, Stroebe, Schut & Zijerveld, 2006: 767).
The few studies that make distinctions between different forms of continuing bonds, call for more
qualitative research to aid the conceptualization and understanding of the different expressions of
continuing bonds. To study the externalized or “strong” expressions assumed to be linked to poorer
grief outcome in a qualitative study, is a further way of contributing to the research. This is underlined
by Field and Filanosky (2010). In their conceptualization of externalized and internalized continuing
bonds expressions, they ask for more research on the externalized form of continuing bonds. They
stated as a limitation of their own research that they do not know how the externalized expression is
subjectively experienced. Based on their findings, they assumed that it is experienced as unbidden and
distressing, similar to traumatic memories, but the measures they used do not provide specific
information. It could be that the hallucinations are perceived as positive and comforting, which is
partly what my study aims to investigate.
2.3.3.
Meaning making in bereavement
Field et al.’s studies, which have been described above make a point of the meaning making as a
mediating factor in the study of bereavement accommodation. PDP experiences, which are culturally
prescribed—and ritually deliberately enacted—can, according to Field (2006), be adaptive. If this is
the case, the PDP perceptions are not in the same way segregated from reality, and thus, they are not
hallucinatory and dissociative. If the PDP perceptions are linked to a religious belief that the dead are
65
Noteworthy here is that the association was between scores on a continuing bonds scale and scores on a grief inventory,
and the authors suggested, as has been suggested elsewhere (Stroebe & Shut, 2005), that the two scales were possibly
conceptually confounded.
58
in heaven, for instance, it would not be indicative of dissociation that it is fully compatible with the
person’s dominant belief system (Field, Gao, & Paderna, 2005).
The meaning making perspective in bereavement is put on the agenda by Neimeyer and his colleagues
(for instance Neimeyer, 2000, 2012; Neimeyer, Prigerson & Davies, 2002, Neimeyer, Baldwin &
Gillies, 2006; Lichtenthal, Currier, Neimeyer & Keese, 2010), and it is from these studies that the
differentiation between meaning making as sense making and as benefit finding is elaborated (see
section 1.3). Holland, Currier, and Neimeyer (2006) not only conceptualized the two forms of
meaning making, but they also studied their specific and interrelated functions. On this matter,
Holland et al. found that high sense making and low benefit finding gave the best adaption to the loss,
low sense making, and high benefit finding gave poorer adaption, but better than low sense making
and low benefit finding. The interaction of sense making and benefit finding in predicting
complicated grief remained robust regardless of cause of death or nature of the relationship to the
deceased (Holland, Currier, & Neimeyer 2006: 183)
These findings indicate that the ability to make sense of the experience is important in accommodating
the loss. They also suggest that sense making and benefit finding are interlaced and influence each
other. This is contrary to the study of Davis, Nolen-Heksema, and Larson in 1998, which Holland et
al. intended to replicate. In the study of Davis et al. (1998), sense making and benefit finding were
found as two separate trajectories. In the study of Holland et al. (2006), it was shown that the two
influenced each other. There are also some other differences: Davis et al.(1998), suggested that sense
making predicts adaption to loss in the early period of bereavement, whereas benefit finding primarily
plays an ameliorative role as time progresses. In the case of Holland et al.(2006), time was not related
to the outcome in that way.
Holland, Currier, and Neimeyer (2006) call for research with more refined measures, which can help
clarify the facets or types of meaning making associated with more favorable grief outcomes. They
also call for combinations of qualitative and quantitative studies. Their presented studies do not
particularly focus on PDP experiences, but in the meaning making, PDP may play a part. This thesis
will focus on the meaning making through the PDP experience. It uses the differentiation of meaning
making into sense making and significance (benefit finding) as a framework for the study of PDP
experiences and their related meaning making.
In the next section, I will outline some of the findings in the qualitative studies on PDP within a
bereavement context, which thematize the phenomenology of the experience, the functions of the
experience, and the sense making.
59
2.3.4.
Qualitative studies on the PDP experience
When it comes to research on the subjective valuation of the experience, there seems to be growing
assumptions that in the majority of cases the experience is regarded as positive by the perceivers. In
Rees’ (1971) quantitative studies on PDP, the proportion of negative experiences compared to positive
was 6% compared to 69%, 86% of the respondents viewed their experiences as comforting, 8% as
upsetting, and 6% as frightening.
In qualitative studies, the positive function has been described as comforting (Chan et al., 2005;
Datson & Marwit, 1997), providing reassurance, which helps perceivers build new lives (Longman,
Lindstrom, & Clark, 1988) by helping to make sense of the death and resolve the trauma arising from
it (Conant, 1996; Tyson-Rawson, 1996), resolving unfinished business with the deceased (Parker,
2005), confirming that the relationship with the deceased continues (Richards et al., 1999; Steffen &
Coyle, 2011), and bestowing a sense of being cared for (Conant, 1996). Viewing the deceased as a
guardian angel or as someone to turn to for help, which leads to a sense of being protected, is also
found (Klugman, 2006). Further, strengthening the belief in an afterlife (Sormanti & August, 1997)
and, in general, strengthening and awakening spiritual and religious beliefs are also findings connected
to the PDP and found in qualitative studies (Kwilecki, 2011; Parker, 2005; Steffen & Coyle, 2011).
Thus, there seems to be a growing body of qualitative research pointing to the positive subjective
response to the experience of PDP. Moreover, the positive response seems to be related to both grief
and spirituality.
Several studies point to spirituality as a resource in meaning making after bereavement and ask
whether sense of presence experiences can be considered spiritual experiences. They also focus on
spiritual growth through the PDP experiences (Klass, 1999; Steffen & Coyle, 2012; Nowatski &
Kalischuk, 2009). Klass (1999) categorized his findings of spiritual experiences of continuing bonds,
which I will present in the theory chapter (section 3.2.) and use in the analysis (section 9.2.).
Ganzevoort and Falkenburg (2012), in an interview study with nine bereaved parents, analyzed what
role spiritual experiences play in the narrative construction of continuity and discontinuity in the
changed relationship between parents and the deceased child. Ganzevoort and Falkenburg’s (2012)
main finding was that the parents articulate both continuity and discontinuity in the bonds with their
deceased children. They are aware that their child is dead and that they are somewhere other than
“here.” Yet, there is still a continuation of communication. Further, Ganzevoort and Falkenburg
(2012) conceptualized visual and auditory after-death experiences as a spiritual experience, although
making sense of the loss did not always lead to a coherent worldview. They also viewed the post
mortem experiences as a part of grief. In my study, I take an open approach, not predefining the PDP
experiences as either grief or spirituality.
60
I now turn to some of the most relevant publications in relation to the present study. The four most
similar studies to this study were published after I had started to work on my dissertation and had built
up the design and research questions. However, having incorporated those studies during the process,
and since I use them in the analysis, I will give them some space in the following.
Nowatski and Kalischuk (2009) in their publications, “Post death encounters: Grieving, mourning and
healing,” asked some of the same questions as I, and had a similar design with interviews of 23
individuals who reported a post death encounter following the death of a loved one. Similar to my
study, they used hermeneutical phenomenological analysis. In short, they found that the participants
went through an interpretive process to make sense of their experiences. This affected their beliefs
and attitudes towards a life after death; it gave a new and strengthened belief in an afterlife and a
decreased fear of death. The experience further functioned as healing by contributing to a sense of
connectedness. In Nowatski and Kalischuk’s (2009) study, all the participants believed in a life after
death. In my study, there is a moderate spread in worldview, which adds some other dynamics to the
sense making process. I also focus more on the perceptual qualities and the content of the experiences
than do Nowatski and Kalischuk (2009).
Hayes’ (2011) doctoral thesis, “Experiencing the presence of the deceased: Symptoms, spirits or
ordinary life?” also approached the experience of presence in bereavement, although she also
discussed theories from a broader field of psychology. Hayes (2011) used ethnomethodology and
conversation analysis, and focused on the way the participants made the experience meaningful.
Hayes (2011) found the experiences meaningful, whether they were positive or negative in their
function. In the context of Hay’s study in UK there were available cultural resources, and the
participants used both spiritual and psychological ideas to make sense of their experiences. The
personal history of the participants was particularly important in making sense of the experiences. The
functions were diverse, ranging from more psychological help with resolving unfinished business to
more practical and ordinary help. Hayes’ (2011) sample was partly from a clinical context, which may
elicit more negative experiences than other studies, although the majority of her participants valued the
experience positively. The findings were discussed against mainstream psychological theories on such
experiences and concluded that these theories (cognitive psychology, medical psychiatry, grief
theories) strip the experiences “of their diversity and important aspects of their meaning” (p. 7). She
further examined the role of spiritual sense making, but did not look at how religion and spirituality
may be evolving through the PDP experience, which is one of my focal points.
Steffen and Coyle (2010, 2011) have published two articles based on qualitative semi-structured
interviews with 12 participants. The first article, studying extant literature, suggested that the sense of
61
presence experience can be conceptualized as a spiritual phenomenon expressed within the continuing
bonds with the deceased. The second article draws on qualitative investigation. Here, Steffen and
Coyle (2011) considered three themes central to the analysis; that is, the bereaved find benefit in (1)
the continuation of the deceased and (2) the continued relationship, and (3) they find meaning through
existential, spiritual, and religious sense making. The findings in this study also point to meaning
making beyond the immediate coping, which seems to require the availability of spiritual or religious
frameworks that can be used to meaningfully accommodate the experience. Steffen and Coyle (2011)
further examined discrepancies between the beliefs related to their experience of loss and the global
beliefs of the participants, the lack of available conceptual framework or conflict between the
experience and religious doctrines drawing on the meaning making model of Park (2005).
Steffen and Coyle’s (2011) methodological approach and the focus on the experience and meaning
making of PDP are relatively similar to this study. However, I put more weight on the socio-cultural
perspective in the choice of theoretical framework. This is also mentioned by Steffen and Coyle as a
call for further research. Moreover, Steffen and Coyle proposed that the role of existing spiritual and
religious conceptual frameworks with regard to sense-of presence-experiences (which here also
include the more sensory experiences) needs further investigation. In particular, there is a lack of
research on non-religious meaning systems and their role in meaning making. Regarding the latter, I
will explore secular, non-religious meaning making through sampling participants with diverse
worldviews. My study will also investigate sensory experiences of PDP in more depth.
Until I discovered Keen, Murray, and Payne’s article from late 2013, I thought that this study
contributed with two novel approaches: a focus on sensory PDP experiences and an element of nonreligious meaning making in PDP experiences. Reading Keen et al.(2013), I learned that they had
found the same lacuna for their study; however, there are some differences. As I have included both
the sensory and the quasi-sensory experience, I open for nuances and new conceptualizations between
the two categories. Although Keen, Murray, and Payne (2013) also used interpretive
phenomenological analysis and drew on interviews, my theoretical approach of Dialogical Self Theory
is a different and theoretical contribution.
The findings of Keen et al. (2013) support previous research that sense of presence experiences can be
comforting and can be explored within a religious/spiritual framework. They find, in line with Hayes
(2011), that the meanings are personal, as the participants make connections between the experience
and characteristics of that particular person when he or she was alive. An interesting finding in this
study is that people may not only feel stigmatized by their experiences, but also privileged to have
special talents to communicate with the deceased. However, as with Hayes, Keen et al. (2013) do not
62
investigate the change and growth in worldview through the experience—which is one of my
perspectives.
In the analysis of my material, I will come back to some of these contributions and discuss the
similarities and divergences of my findings.
To sum up on bereavement research, there is a lack of phenomenological studies regarding presence
experience (Steffen & Coyle, 2012, 2010). Although several qualitative studies have been published,
the perceptual qualities and content of the experience have been in the background, as
phenomenological oriented research has focused more on the personal evaluation and meaning making
process (Conant, 1996; Parker, 2005). The studies described above—particularly Hayes (2011)66—
have some focus on the experiential qualities, although there is still a need for further and
supplementary research. This study will place greater weight on the perceptual quality and
phenomenological content of the experience. In addition, my special focus on the sensory PDP
experiences and further examination of the conceptualization will fill some of the lacunas of the
previous research. Regarding meaning making in relation to grief, there is a call for more studies,
which does not approach continuing bonds in general, but looks more specifically at the PDP
experiences and their potential role in bereavement related meaning making (Steffen & Coyle, 2011).
The socio-cultural approach to meaning making and non-religious meaning systems, as potentially
meaning making resources, is also a contribution of this dissertation to the research.
Sections 1.1.2 and 2.1. showed that experiencing the presence of the deceased is a common
experience, particularly following bereavement. Research from the last decades has shown that this
experience tends to be valued as positive and meaningful by the perceivers, with some exceptions.
Yet, for most of the twentieth century, it has been described in terms of pathology in bereavement
literature (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). There is now a growing consensus to consider the experience
“normal” and potentially beneficial for the well-being of the experiencer. However, there is an
ongoing debate within bereavement scholarship regarding the nature and healthiness of this
experience. To put it another way: What some of the correlational studies appear to suggest is that
people often report finding the experience beneficial but that having the experience is not necessarily
indicative of a better bereavement outcome, as defined through clinical measurement. There is thus, to
some extent, a conflict between clinical measurements and the subjective response of experiencers.
Steffen and Coyle (2010) raised the question of what is a good grief outcome, and asked if it is only
the absence of clinically measured grief symptoms. Alternatively, they suggested it can it be
broadened to incorporate a more subjective felt wellbeing and meaning. Meaning making is central in
66
Hayes wrote a monograph, which has more pages than an article and, thus, may show more of the perceptual qualities of
the experience, in addition to the meaning making.
63
the recent studies of continuing bonds in bereavement. There seems to be emerging evidence
suggesting that those who can make sense of their experience within culturally sanctioned conceptual
frameworks enjoy greater benefits as a result. Accordingly, recent grief research tends to include not
only the absence of grief symptoms, but also personal growth when investigating the outcomes of
continuing bonds (Field and Filanosky, 2010).
64
Chapter 3: THEORETICAL COMPOSITION
This chapter will present the theoretical framework for the study. As reflected in the introduction, I
have chosen two main theories, providing different perspectives to the analysis: Hubert Hermans’
Dialogical Self Theory (DST) and the Continuing Bonds Theory (CBT),67 as it is formulated by
Dennis Klass.
The two theories have some similarities, but also differences. One difference lies in the generic level
of the two: DST is a theory which covers a wide range of the human self and behavior; whereas CBT
focuses on a narrower segment of human functioning. DST suggests how the self is composed and
how it works through dialogue. CBT, on the other hand, is a theory about grief, in which “post death
presence” is seen as an expression of grief. In that way CBT, as a theory, is closer to the empirical
material of this study. DST is neither a mini-theory nor a grand theory, but an “in-between” theory
which contributes an open vocabulary in which different, separate conceptual systems can find a
platform (Hermans & Gieser, 2012: 1). However, this does not mean that DST is an abstract theory,
far removed from the empirical world. Both CBT and DST are connected to empirical research, and
both are used in clinical work.68 I will come back to a dialogue between the two theories in the
discussion chapter. Now I will turn to a presentation of the Dialogical Self Theory.
67
The Continuing Bonds Theory is sometimes termed just “Continuing Bonds” (see, for instance, Steffen & Coyle 2010;
2011; Schut, Stroebe, Boelen & Zijerveld 2006). Some use the term model instead of theory, probably to indicate
application to the empirical investigation of grief. The term theory is then used to explain the manifestations and process of
grief, whereas model more specifically relates to coping in bereavement (Stroebe & Shut 2001: 386). Klass & Silverman
(1996:3) use model in a wider sense as “an ideal set of interactions or processes that make sense of multifarious data”. In
line with this understanding of model and my broad understanding of theory (see section 3.4.4.), I use both theory and
model in relation to the Continuing Bonds paradigm. As I will later enlarge on, CBT can be used as a coping model in
addition to being a theory about the relationship between grief and continuing bonds. However, for the case of simplicity, I
abbreviate it as CBT.
68
In the case of DST, The Valuation Theory and the related Self Confrontation Method have been applied in clinical practice
(see Hermans and Hermans-Jansen 1995) while the Personal Position Repertoire is especially used in psychological research
(Hermans 2001b and 2008). In the case of CBT, there are several coping models for grief, for instance Tony Walters’
biographical and narrative grief model which I will describe in 3.2.4.
65
3.1. Dialogical Self Theory
In the following chapter I will first give an outline of the main features of DST, including the
inspirational ideas behind the theory. Secondly, I will highlight some relevant parts. My aim is not to
elaborate on all aspects of DST, but rather to present theoretical elements that I find useful for
composing a conceptual framework for the analysis and interpretation of the material, in the light of
the research questions.
To put it simply, one can say that DST is a theory about the self and about dialogue and about the
interconnectedness of self and dialogue. As reflected in the introduction chapter, DST can be seen as a
theoretical contribution to the question of how meaning making takes place as dialogue in the
extended self. Hence, the theory contributes perspectives to the main research question: How do
people make meaning of their post death presence experiences? Moreover, as a theory about the self,
it opens some possibilities for interpreting how people (and selves) can experience PDP which relates
to the other main research question.
3.1.1. The development of Dialogical Self Theory
DST was developed in the early ‘90s by Hubert J. M. Hermans, who is now an emeritus professor in
personality and clinical psychology at the Radboud University in Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Together with the cultural psychologists Harry Kempen and Rens van Loon, he published the first
article on DST in 1992: “The Dialogical Self: Beyond Individualism and Rationalism.” In 1993
Hermans and Kempen set out the background and the basic features of their theory in the book: “The
Dialogical Self: Meaning as Movement.” Since then, Hermans and his colleagues have elaborated on
the theory, have expanded its use, and included new concepts (Hermans, 2012). Although Hermans is
seen as the founder and the main architect of DST (Zock, 2011), he has worked and written together
with several others.69 Consequently, the theory has been composed in dialogue with researchers from
different areas, 70 and the DST is applied to a variety of fields71 which have also contributed to the
development of the theory.
69
In addition to Harry J.G. Kempen, the co-author of the first article, and of the first book, The Dialogical Self: Meaning as
Movement (Hermans and Kempen, 1993) and Rens J.P. van Loon, Hermans has cooperated with Giancarly Dimaggio
(Hermans and Dimaggio 2004; 2007); Thorsten Gieser (Hermans and Gieser, 2012); Els Hermans-Jansen, his colleague and
first wife; and Agnieszika Hermans-Konopka, who is his second wife, inter alia.
70
For instance Hermans credits the development of the concept of ‘deposition’ to his wife and colleague A. HermansKonopka after she, during psychotherapy, discovered a function of the self which was not accounted for in the original
theory.
71
As, for instance, cultural psychology, educational psychology, psychotherapy, personality psychology, developmental
psychology, psychopathology, experimental social psychology, career counseling, methodology etc. (Hermans & HermansKonopka, 2010: 21). I have in a footnote in the introductory chapter referred to an application of the theory within the field
of psychology of religion.
66
Hermans calls the theory “a bridging theory in which a larger diversity of theories, research traditions
and practices meet, or will meet, in order to create new and unexpected linkages” (Hermans and
Gieser, 2012: 1). According to Hermans, the theoretical framework is formulated in an open way so
different conceptual approaches can find a platform that enables them to engage with each other.
However, DST is not a synthesis of different theories. It is a theory with its own identity and specific
conceptual framework (Hermans and Gieser, 2012).
3.1.2. Inspirational ideas: James, Mead and Bakhtin
In his publications, Hermans clarifies the sources of his ideas, and enters into a dialogue in the course
of which he composes the specific conceptual framework for the DST. Several dialogues are
happening in Hermans’ texts, but his main inspiration can be said to come from the literature theorist
Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of the polyphonic novel, and from William James’ distinction between the I
(as a knower) and the me (as the known), and from George Herbert Mead’s concept of the generalized
other.72 Hermans attributes his view of the self to American pragmatism, together with James and
Mead, and the notion of dialogue to the Russian dialogical school, and to Bakhtin.
William James’ (1890) distinction between the I and the me is a foundation and forerunner to the DST.
It paves the way for the notion of an extended and decentralized self, which Hermans develops further
into the conceptual framework of DST. In James’ terminology the I is the self-as-a-knower, or the
self-as-subject. The I organizes and interprets experience in a subjective manner.73 The me, on the
other hand, is the self-as-known, or the self-as-object. There is, in James’ view, a gradual transition
between the me and mine, and hence the me can be identified as the empirical self that in its broadest
sense is composed of all that the person can call his or her own.74 This means that people and things in
the environment—which can, for instance, be body, clothes, possessions, thoughts or relations—
belong to the self, in so far as they are felt as mine.75 The me represents a discontinuity in the extended
self, whereas the I safeguards the continuity. The I can, however, never be dissolved from the me, and
consequently the I cannot be thought of as separate from the body, which is me or mine. This
contrasts with the Cartesian self, which is based on dualistic conceptions of self and body, and self and
72
In the introduction to Handbook of Dialogical Self Theory, one of the latest publications, Hermans & Gieser (2012) call
special attention to these three theorists: William James, George Herbert Mead and Mikhail Bakhtin. But, as in most of
Hermans publications, there are also other inspirational ideas, as for instance M. Buber’s I-you relationship, Levinas’ notion
of alterity (Hermans & Gieser, 2012). However, it is James, Mead and Bakhtin whose ideas recur as the main inspiration in
the majority of Hermans’ publications.
73
The I is further characterized by continuity, distinctness and volition.
74
To quote James, the self as known is “not only his body and his psychic powers, but his clothes and his house, his wife
and children, his ancestors and friends, his reputation and works, his lands and horses, and yacht and bank-account” (James
1890: 291).
75
Material characteristics (body, clothes, possessions), spiritual characteristics (thoughts, consciousness) and social
characteristics (relations, roles) belong to the me.
67
other. In the extended self, self and body are connected, and the other is not simply “outside the skin”.
Consequently, James paves the way for DST (and other theoretical contributions) where negotiations
with the other- in- the- self, in close connection with the actual other, are part of an extended, multiple
self (Hermans and Gieser, 2012: 3). Hermans translates the I-me into the concept of the I-position,
and brings in another perspective on the continuity and discontinuity of the self. In contrast to James,
Hermans points out that the I is also plural, and the other is an integral part of the self. In Hermans’
view, the I has continuity, because it is the same I, and the position has discontinuity because it moves
in space.
Mead (1934) also makes a distinction between I and me, although he differs from James in some
regards.76 According to Hermans, Mead elaborates even more than James on the pervasive
significance of the other to the self, and even in the self. He does so by introducing the concept of the
generalized other and taking the role of the other. Hermans further redefines the generalized other as
a collective voice and emphasizes how collective voices speak through the voice of an individual
person (Hermans & Kempen, 1993: xxii).
Although Mead is one of the inspirations behind the notion of a social self, Hermans, in line with other
theorists,77 criticizes Mead for sticking to a theory of internalization which prevents the self from
being seen as dialogical. Taking the role of the other, or internalizing the other, is only one part of the
dialogical self, according to Hermans.78 He claims that Mead’s theory is based on a homogenous
society metaphor. The generalized other, which is seen as social and emotional rules in general, has
now become more complex in a world society that, as a result of globalization and localization, has led
to the emergence of a variety of interfaces between cultures. At these interfaces, different and even
conflicting social and emotional rules operate and make dialogue necessary (Hermans & Gieser,
2012).
This brings the focus on to Bakhtin. It is precisely from Bakhtin that Hermans takes the key concepts
of dialogue and multivoicedness, “and the intertwining of internal and external dialogical
relationships” (Zock, 2011: 167). Hermans’ use of Bakhtin progresses beyond the idea of the
polyphonic novel, which emerged in Bakhtin’s writing after intensive reading of Dostoevsky’s literary
76
James and Mead agree on the agentic qualities of the I. The self is not limited to the internalization of the attitude of
others within itself and deemed to conform to existing institutional structures. Mead indicated this by referring to the
innovative potentials of the self, whereas James made a strong case for its capacity to appropriate or to reject (Hermans
and Gieser 2012). In Mead’s view innovation is part of the capacity of the I, while the social rules and conventions of the
generalized other are placed in the me (Mead 1934).
77
Taylor, for instance, argues that the self arises within conversation, in which one or more parties take initiative in giving
form to dialogical processes (Taylor, 1995). He criticizes Mead for having no place for dialogical action. He holds that Mead
is sticking to a theory of internalization.
78
Hermans states that the me, or the generalized other in Mead’s terms, cannot function as a relatively autonomous
position or creative voice in the self, and that the functioning of the I is seriously reduced because it lacks intentionality and
purpose (Hermans & Kempen, 1993: 110).
68
works. The idea is simply that there is no single author at work, but that several authors are
represented by characters in the novels. Each character figures as the author of his or her own
ideology. Accordingly, there is no final product of the author’s artistic vision. In this way, the
polyphonic novel creates a diversity of perspectives. Characters can coexist and live side by side
simultaneously, in space. Also, inner contradictions in the self can be dramatized in space. This
presents the possibility of seeing temporally distributed thoughts or experiences as a polyphony of
spatial oppositions. The idea of the polyphonic novel also suggests the concept of both internal and
external dialogues that Hermans develops further. The inner world of one and the same individual can
be differentiated into an interpersonal relationship, which again is voiced so that a dialogical
relationship of agreement, disagreement or negotiations can take shape79 (Hermans & Gieser, 2012).
The dialogue can then be understood as movement in space.
To sum up, Hermans takes the idea of James’ I-me distinction, and develops it into the concept of the
I-position. He takes the generalized other (from Mead) and the voicing (of Bakhtin), including them
in the concept of individual- and collective voices. The idea of the polyphonic novel, together with
ideas of dialogue and an extended self, are all embraced in the notion of the dialogical self.
3.1.3. Other influences
There are other theoretical influences which I will refer to when presenting the theory. For instance,
DST is much influenced by the narrative theories: Hermans draws, for instance, on Sarbin (1989)
when describing how actions, emotions and perceptions are guided by narrative plots (Hermans &
Kempen, 1993). Another point of crucial importance to Hermans is to understand the other in the
extended self as being on the subject level, and not on the object level as James proposed in his
concept of me. This concept of seeing the other on a subject level may be attributed to Martin Buber’s
study of dialogue (Hermans & Gieser, 2012). Further, Hermans’ use of the term position has some
similarities to positioning theory,80 and, as I have already pointed out, Hermans draws on findings
79
In the Bakhtinian dialogue the ending is open. However, Hermans raises the question of whether dialogical relationships
are as open as suggested by Bakhtinian dialogism. “Persistent defense, protection and conservation of existing local
practices and values restrict the range of possible positions in the self and the openness and innovative potential of
dialogue” (Hermans and Hermans-Konopka, 2010: 54).
80
Hermans moves from the concept of I and me, to the concept of I and position. The term position has some similarities
with positioning theory. They are both concerned with the dynamic qualities of the process of positioning and
repositioning. There is however an important difference: More than conventional positioning theory, DST is focused on the
self as an agentic and original source of meaning production (Hermans & and Hermans-Konopka, 2010: 11). While
positioning theory is focused on the processes that take place between people, DST aims at a profound exploration of the
experiential richness and emotional qualities of the self in close connection with inner subjective processes. Hermans claims
that the embodied nature of the process of positioning precedes the processes of language in the child (Hermans &
Hermans-Konopka, 2010: 11).
69
from different fields, for instance developmental psychology and neuro- psychology (Hermans &
Hermans-Konopka 2010).
3.1.4. Main features of the self
The extended and social self
The Dialogical Self Theory brings together two basic concepts: self and dialogue. In contrast to a
view where self and dialogue are seen as being differently positioned on the internal–external axis,81
DST combines the two concepts so that dialogue takes place within the self. DST holds that the self is
not only something “within the skin,” and dialogue is not only something between two or more people.
In DST the notions of self and dialogue are put together in the concept of an extended self. “The
‘between’ is interiorized into the ‘within’ - and the ‘within’ is exteriorized into the ‘between’”
(Hermans and Gieser, 2012: 2).
Consequently, the self does not have an existence separate from society, but is part of society. The
self becomes a society of mind that is inhabited by people, groups or traditions: like a mother, a
teacher, a colleague or a church. Hermans states that “the self functions as society, being at the same
time part of the broader society in which the self participates” (Hermans 2004:13). Society does not
therefore surround the self, influencing it as an external determinant, but the self is in society, and
society is in the self. Further, the self participates in society with the capacity to respond to society
from the individual’s own original point of view (Hermans, 2012).
Hermans conceptualizes the dialogical self as “a dynamic multiplicity of I positions in the landscape
of the mind, intertwined, as this mind is, with the minds of other people” (Hermans and Dimaggio,
2007: 36).82
81
The self is, at least in Western traditions, seen as a reflexive concept that deals with what takes place within the person,
while dialogue is taking place externally, that is, between person and other (Hermans and Gieser, 2012: 2).
82
Some conceptualizations have added relatively autonomous I-positions, as in the following: “a dynamic multiplicity of
relatively autonomous I-positions in the landscape of the mind” (Hermans et al., 1992; Hermans, 2004: 19).
70
The dynamic self
In addition to being intertwined with other people, the self is dynamic. That is, in the vocabulary of
DST, it participates in a process of taking different positions. Hermans states that the self “fluctuates
between different positions” (Hermans & Gieser, 2012: 2). The I moves in space. In contrast to some
narrative approaches, where time is the defining characteristic of narrative,83 DST emphasizes time
and space as two basic notions that are of equal importance in the organization of narrative. Thus,
“the ‘I’ has the possibility to move, as in a space, from one position to the other in accordance with
changes in situation and time.” (Hermans & Gieser, 2012: 2).
Depending on the position that is taken, the I tells a different story about itself, and speaks with a
different voice. Through the narrative notion of telling a story, Hermans brings in the concept of voice
that he has taken from Bakhtin. He speaks about voicing the self, which means that the self can
imaginatively endow each position with a voice, so that dialogical and dynamic relations between
positions can be established (Hermans, 1996). The voices which are speaking in the different Ipositions function like characters in a story. Each character has a story to tell about experiences from
its own stance. The different voices, belonging to the different characters, exchange information about
their respective “me’s,» “creating a complex, narratively structured self” (Hermans & Gieser, 2012: 3).
When two or more positions come into play, the process of meaning making starts. The positions can
both agree and disagree with each other. Hermans and Gieser articulate it in the following way:
The embodied “I” is able to move from one position to the other in accordance with changes
in situation and time. In this process of positioning, repositioning and counterpositioning, the
“I” fluctuates among different and even opposed positions (both within the self and between
the self and perceived or imagined others), and these positions are involved in relationships of
relative dominance and social power. (Hermans & Gieser, 2012: 2)
Thus, meaning making is seen as movement in space between different positions. The I-positions can
be harmonious or disharmonious, they can be in dialogue, or they can dominate and bring the other
into silence.
83
Hermans refers to Sarbin (1990) and Gergen & Gergen (1988) who both emphasize the temporal context of experience
(Hermans & Kempen, 1993: 58).
71
The decentralized self
With relatively autonomous I-positions, who sometimes disagree, the self can look fragmented.
However, Hermans emphasizes that the self is not necessarily falling apart. Even though there are
relatively autonomous I-positions, there are also movements within the self that keep the different
parts together. In his introduction to the Handbook of Dialogical Self Theory, from 2012, Hermans
points to two forces in the self, a decentering and a centering movement (Hermans & Gieser, 2012).
When the I takes a variety of possible positions, each with their own relatively autonomous stories, it
is seen as a decentering movement. When, on the other hand, the I appropriates or rejects some
positions, it is seen as a centering movement. In line with James, Hermans views the self as capable of
appropriating some positions as mine and belonging to myself, and consequently adding to the
coherence and continuity of the self (Hermans and Gieser, 2012). There is both continuity and
discontinuity in the self, according to Hermans. This double movement is found in his interpretation
of the core concept, the I-position.
The term I- position is deliberately chosen because it places the continuity in the term “I” and
the discontinuity in the term “position”. As far as the individual takes different and contrasting
positions (and associated attitudes) there is discontinuity; because it is the same “I” that is
involved in these changes, there is continuity. (Hermans & Kempen, 1993: 115)
Crucial, however, is that the self does not have an overarching I who necessarily organizes the several
positions towards equilibrium. Neither is there a center or a core. Hence, the self is basically
decentralized. Hermans holds that one of the specific features of DST is that “it does not assume that
the self is unified and centralized on a priori grounds” (Hermans, 2012:3). However, the self can
engage in centering movements. Unity and coherence are thus considered a goal rather than a given
(Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). DST is not a theory, says Hermans, that shows what people
are, but what they are becoming. It emphasizes the potentials of individuals as they give form to their
lives (Hermans, 2012: 2). As will be discussed later, there are positions, such as the third position, the
meta- position and deposition, which the self can adopt as centering movements, however it is not a
given that these will lead to a sense of continuity in the self.
The decentralized self may be associated with a dissociative self, and even with a dissociative
disorder, which is characterized by a discontinuity in the normal integration of, for instance, emotions,
perceptions, consciousness and behavior (DSM V American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Hermans
responds that it is the organization of the position repertoire, and the flexibility and accessibility of the
different positions, which determine a healthy functioning. He posits some criteria for a healthily
functioning self: a) presence of a certain hierarchy of positions, in order to avoid an overly fragmented
72
repertoire, b) the accessibility of positions, c) the flexibility to move from one position to another and
d) an affective variety of the positions (Hermans, 2004: 23). It is thus not the decentralized self in
itself that produces dysfunctionality, according to Hermans, but how the decentralized self manages to
organize and be flexible with both centering and decentering movements. The problem is neither,
according to Hermans that conversation with others is replaced by conversation with hallucinations,
but that exchanges with hallucinations are not dialogical, as other persons seldom easily will confirm
the hallucinations making the exchange unidirectional (Lysaker & Hermans, 2007).
The embodied and emotional self
Hermans views the nature of positioning as embodied. Leaning towards findings in developmental
psychology, he claims that the embodied nature of the process of positioning precedes the use of
language by a child. As an example, he points to giving and taking during the process of feeding in
the first year of life as a non-verbal or pre-verbal manifestation of dialogue (Hermans & HermansKonopka 2010).
Although Hermans describes the self as a predominantly narrative process, he does not belong to the
social constructivists who consider meaning making as a purely discursive phenomenon. The spatial
language is not only metaphorical. Hermans emphasizes the embodiedness of the dialogical self, and
its rootedness in bodily development and neurobiological structures (Zock, 2011).
Emotions are expressed through the dialogical voices. Dialogical voices can, according to Hermans, be
reasoned or emotional. They can argue, negotiate and convince, but they can also shout, cry, express
anger, joy, love and fear (Hermans & Hermans- Konopka, 2010). Hence, actions, emotions and
cognitions are intertwined in the different positions.
Further, Hermans holds a theory of emotions that starts from the idea that dominant I-positions,
especially those linked with early relationships, have a neurological substrate in the brain. This is not
to return to an essentialising and physiological view of emotions, he claims. Emotions are intrinsically
social and societal. The socially developed emotions are, however, also produced in the brain.
Further, emotions are position bound. That is, the position one takes will determine which emotions
come to the fore, and how they acquire shape. The emotion of grief will, for instance, be different for
the different I-positions: “I as a daughter,” “I as scholar” and “I as dependent.” The expression of
grieving and the coping strategies will, moreover, be determined by one’s early relationships, and by
the cultural and religious collective voices (Zock, 2011). They will also be elicited through the actual
relations. Following on from that, emotions can be studied as interactional and dialogical phenomena
that are influenced by counter-emotions in a complex process.
73
3.1.5. Positions, voices and movement in space
I will now go more deeply into the idea of the dialogical self as movement and positioning in space.
This way of viewing the dynamics of the self will be the focusing lens for the analysis in looking at
how the participants make meaning in relation to their PDP experiences. The movement and
positioning in space are characterized by different types of position. I will now turn to a description of
these as they will be used in the conceptual framework of the analysis.
Collective and individual voices
Voices in the self are not purely individual constructions. They also reflect the collective voices in
society; groups, communities and cultures to which the individual belongs. Individual voices are
deeply infiltrated by the culture of groups and institutions, including their power difference and
express their collective elements in professional jargon, socio-political ideologies, dialects, national
languages etc. (Hermans & Kempen, 1993). The collective voices can be expressed through
individual voices, as for instance the voice of a local priest representing the collective narrative of the
Church, or the voice of “I as a member of a political party with a certain ideology.” As such,
individual and collective voices are infiltrated in each other.
Contrasting and dominant positions
The self is capable of interrelating different and relatively autonomous positions in such a way that
they are brought together as components of an organized whole (Hermans & Kempen, 1993), but, as
pointed out, the dialogical process is not always harmonious. As a society of mind the I is also voiced
with tensions, conflicts and contradictions. This is, according to Hermans, an intrinsic feature of a
healthy functioning. As in society, the different I-positions are involved not only in processes of
interchange, but also in struggles. Sometimes the contrasting positions can live side by side, at other
times one or more positions are dominant, and can even bring other positions or voices into silence.
When voices are forced into silence, the dialogue can disappear and give way to monologue. Because
dialogue is constrained by societal power differences, it will, according to Hermans, not always be
present.84 Hermans describes dialogue and monologue as representing different degrees on a
continuum. In some situations the interchange between different I-positions shows a mixture of both
dialogical and monological elements (Hermans & Gieser, 2012). This may have to do with the turn
taking in the dialogue. The dialogical elements can, however, also be restricted by dominant
84
Hermans holds the view that dialogue must not be so broad that it is identical with communication.
74
collective voices, as for instance the voice of a religion or a religious group. Hermans claims that the
possible array of imaginal positions becomes not only organized, but also restricted by the process of
institutionalization. The restriction may happen in family, school or church when some of the possible
positions are approved, while others are disapproved, or even rejected (Hermans & Kempen, 1993).
Hermans reflects on religion as a counter-reaction to the heterogeneity, ambiguity and complexity of
post-modern culture, thus reducing dialogue in the interests of stability and certainty (Hermans &
Dimaggio, 2007).
So, depending on the individual’s history and the collective stories of the groups, cultures and
communities to which the individual belongs, some of the positions become more dominant than
others, some positions will agree, others will disagree, and some will enter into a process of
intersubjective exchange (Hermans, 1996).
Third positions and meta-positions
When two positions are involved in a conflict, they can, under certain conditions, be reconciled in a
third position in which the conflict between the original positions is mitigated. The third position can
help to weave a relative self-integration out of strongly contradictory beliefs and values. For instance,
if a Christian person has experiences which are discouraged by Christian leaders, he or she can create
a third position which reconciles the two contrasting positions. The third position might be to
establish oneself as a Christian social worker (and thus keep an identity as a Christian) among people
with similar negative experiences, and thereby still identify with the discouraged experience (Hermans
& Gieser, 2012).
Being reflective, the self can also move above itself and take a “helicopter-view.” This meta- position
permits a certain distance. It provides an overarching view so that more than one position can be seen
simultaneously, and relevant linkages between positions become visible. However, a meta- position is
not to be considered as the center or the core. It is not an agentic force that guarantees the unity and
coherence of the self in advance. The meta-position is always bound to one or more internal and
external positions that are actualized at a particular moment, and in a particular situation, and as such it
is a dialogical phenomenon. As pointed out, multiplicity precedes any unity or synthesis of the self in
the DST. Yet, meta-positions can organize the self as a whole, and give space to voices which have
been in the background. However, one part may become so dominant that it is impossible for the self
to counterbalance this particular character (Hermans & Kempen, 1993). The meta-position is
therefore dependent on time and situation (Hermans & Gieser, 2012).
75
Promoter positions
While meta- positions facilitate coherence and organization in the self from a spatial point of view,
promoter positions do so from a temporal perspective. Promoter positions can typically be voices of
significant others—real, remembered, anticipated or imaginary—who play a role in one’s self.
Significant others, like mothers and fathers, may exert a long lasting influence as promoters of one’s
development (or as anti-promoters, in a case where they function as an impediment to one’s
development). Similarly, inspiring people from religion, science, politics and music etc. can have the
same function. Such figures can serve as a source facilitating the development of existing I-positions
and generating new ones. Hermans holds that imagined figures, as well as actual figures, may
function in promoter positions. One can, for instance, have a daily dialogue with an image of divinity,
or a deceased family member, that figures in the “ultimate promoter position”. Promoters can be
given a stabilized and influential place in the extended self (Hermans & Gieser, 2012).
The integrative power of promoter positions has the potential to compensate for the disorganizing
influence resulting from change or loss of important positions in the self (Hermans & HermansKonopka, 2010). The loss of a parent will, for instance, change the position the deceased holds within
the extended self, and a promoter position can compensate by creating an image of the deceased from
which support and strength can be received (Hermans & Gieser, 2012).
De-positions
In some of his later publications Hermans develops the theory further by introducing the concept of
de-positioning. The idea, which he attributes to his wife, Agniezika Hermans-Konopka, results from
the observation that there is an implicit or explicit assumption in studies of the dialogical self, namely
that the I is always bound to the flow of positions. In contrast to this view, Hermans-Konopka
proposes that the I is not necessarily defined by a position, but has its own nature and qualities. The I
can hence be engaged in a process of de-positioning. It has the possibility of dis-identifying from any
specific position. When doing that it enters a form of consciousness that is a thought-free,
transcendental awareness. Hermans, in one of his latest publications, calls this a mystical state.85
“The de-positioned ‘I’ is no longer attached to or influenced by any particular position but participates
in a broader space of transcendental awareness” (Hermans, 2012: 34).
In the states of awareness that the mystical experiences creates, “the space becomes transformed and
the spatial boundaries even recede” (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010: 171). At the same time,
85
Hermans also relates to one of his own youthful experiences of being in such a state of heightened awareness that he
relates it to a unifying mystical experience, with reference to Forman’s (1999) category (Hermans 2012: 34).
76
the experiences are best described by just using the metaphor of space. Hermans and HermansKonopka introduce the concept of paradoxical space. That is, the I leaves the ordinary self-space and
participates in a broader awareness, which in turn can only be articulated and expressed by using a
spatial metaphor.
Contrary to the meta-position where the I is still bound to a different position (although at a distance)
the de-position is no longer located in a particular position, or even meta-position (Hermans &
Hermans-Konopka, 2010). “Central to the mystical experiences are the openness and receptivity of
the self, the high permeability of its boundaries, and it’s becoming part of a larger whole”86 (Hermans
& Hermans Konopka, 2010: 171).
As mentioned previously, Hermans considers the self as appropriating. The appropriating I is an agent
that brings elements to the self, and removes elements from the self. The I as appropriative calls
certain things and persons mine and includes them within the boundaries of the self. However, the self
is also receptive, which means that the I can receive elements from beyond the agency of the self. The
self then does not appropriate it, but receives it “as a gift, a challenge or destiny” (Hermans &
Hermans-Konopka, 2010: 173). When the I takes on the function of receptive, agency is brought to
the other as another I. Hermans and Hermans-Konopka (2010) claim that becoming a part of the
broader field of awareness seems to move the appropriating function into the background.
3.1.6. Spatiality between internal and external domains
Related to the spatial movement is the notion of the internal and external aspects of the self. I will in
the following look at how DST describes the relation between “outer” and “inner” positions, and
between perceptual and imaginal space. The spatiality and the porosity of the self is a way of
establishing a conceptual framework from which I can analyze the spatiality of the perceptual
experiences of PDP. The intertwinement of imagined and perceptual space will also be presented, as it
highlights some aspects of the experience of seeing or hearing a dead person.
86
They emphasize that in a globalized society the “meaningfully ordered” is rather a challenge than a given (Hermans &
Hermans-Konopka 2010: 171)
77
Internal and external positions
As pointed out, there is no sharp separation between the internal life of the self and the outside world,
but rather a gradual transition (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). Hermans however makes a
distinction between positions which belong to the more internal domain of the self, and positions
which belong to the external domain. Positions in the internal domain can for instance be, “I as a
psychologist”, “I as a mother”, “I as a lover of music”, “I as jealous”, “I as sensitive”. They may have
a more personal character, or a more social character related to the I as a member of social and cultural
groups. Positions belonging to the external domain of the self are, for instance, “my wife”, “my
children”, “my guardian angel”, “my enemy”, “the protestant church.” External I- positions indicate
others speaking in the self. They can be either individual voices or collective voices. Dialogues may
then take place between internal positions (e.g., a conflict between a position as a husband and a
position as a hard-working scientist), between internal and external positions (e.g., an argument I had
with my colleague, Ruth) and between external positions (e.g., disagreement between my colleagues
on psychological matters) (Hermans & Kempen, 1993). The internal and external positions are,
however, impossible to separate. All voices are colored simultaneously by one’s personal character
and life history, and by the cultural groups one is part of. For instance, the internal “I as grieving” is
influenced by particular cultural views on grief, and resonates together with, and simultaneously with,
collective voices of grief87 (Zock, 2011).
Although he frequently maintains that there are no rigid boundaries between the inside and outside,
Hermans has made another distinction between inside and outside in his texts. This has to do with
imaginative figures and “real” figures as I-positions. Hermans and Kempen (1993) state that others in
the self (external positions) function mainly in the outside world when they are “real” others, like
parents, friends and colleagues, but they belong mainly to the inside world of the individual if they are
imaginal others, like “imaginal lovers, deceased parents or wise advisors” (Hermans & Kempen 1993:
78). A deceased parent is hence both in the external domain, because he is an other-in-the-self, and
internal because he is seen as imaginal. This part of the DST is not widely elaborated on, and I will
come back to it when I discuss it in relation to post death contact experiences, and the Continuing
Bonds Theory.
87
Hermans claims that the boundaries between self and other are diffuse and fluid. Because the other is part of the self,
and because other and self cannot strictly be separated, there is always an experience of otherness—and hence of
multiplicity—in the self (Salgado & Hermans, 2005).
78
Imaginal and perceptual space.
DST assumes the existence of an imaginal space, side by side and interwoven with physical space. A
multiplicity of I-positions located in imaginal space connect to physical appearance in different ways.
It may or may not be congruent with the actual perspective of the actual other (which can be checked
by entering into conversation with the other). It may be largely the product of imagination, and it can
even be completely imaginary (Hermans, Kempen & van Loon, 1992). DST emphasizes the
importance of recognizing not only actual others, but also imaginal others. It is argued that since the
I-positions are not subordinated to the self as a whole, it is possible to think of the soul or the spirit, or
even God, as an I-position that exist in imaginal space (Rowans, 2012: 244). By this the DST may
suggest that the porosity of the self is not only between the self and the world. It is also between the
perceptual and the imaginative.
3.1.7. Valuation
Some of Hermans’ earlier work is based on what he calls his Valuation Theory (Hermans 1987, 1988,
1992). The Valuation Theory focuses on valuations of what is important and significant in people’s
stories. Valuation Theory brings in a conceptual framework for the analysis of the third research
question, which asks for the significance of the PDP experience to the bereaved.
In the Valuation theory the central concept of valuation is:
an active process of meaning construction on the basis of self-reflection. It is an open concept
which includes anything people find to be important when telling their story. A valuation is
any unit of meaning that has a positive (pleasant), negative (unpleasant), or ambivalent (both
pleasant and unpleasant) value in the eyes of the individual. (Hermans & Kempen 1993: 148)
A crucial point in Valuation theory is that each valuation has an affective connotation. When a person
values something he or she always feels something about it. Hermans & Kempen (1993) state that
affects are part of the valuations. They are not a result of cognitive processing. On a manifest level
there are a whole range of different valuations. The valuations vary not only across individuals, but
also within a single individual, across time and space. A person can tell his or her self-narrative with
different emotions linked to different sets of valuations in the same story. On a latent level, however,
Hermans identifies a few basic motives that are represented in the affective component of the
valuation. The two main motives are the striving for self enhancement, and the longing for contact
and union with the other. According to Hermans, these basic latent motives are assumed to be
continuously active within each individual moving through time and space. The two basic motives are
79
mixed with positive or negative feelings in the different valuations, and as such they create different Ipositions, which are illustrated in a simplified way in figure 3.1.6 (see also Hermans, 2012: 60).
• Autonomy
and success
• Unity and
love
• Aggression
and anger
• Unfullfilled
longing
Figure 3.1.6 Valuation theory
In later years Hermans has extended the Valuation theory to encompass a more dialogical stance
(Hermans, 2012). He has taken into account not only how the basic motives influence the content and
organization of people’s experiences, but also how they function in communication. When two or
more people respond to each other’s motives, they cause movement in each other’s motives,
valuations and affects. The same dialogue can take place within the self of an individual person
(Hermans, 2012).
Valuation theory is a smaller theory within the overall framework of DST. It provides a conceptual
understanding that can distinguish different positions in the self, and how they are moving.
Confronted with manifold experiences, spread over time and space, the basic motives in Valuation
theory can be used as a tool to find order and direction. However, it also offers a concrete strategy for
assessment and change of valuation systems in therapy. The Self Confrontation Method (Hermans,
2012; Hermans & Dimaggio 2004; Hermans & Kempen, 1993) is a model for therapy, based on
Valuation theory, which invites the individual to investigate his or her own valuation system in close
collaboration with a psychologist.
80
3.1.8. DST as a conceptual framework for studying the experience of post death presence.
In the explanation above I have shown how DST can contribute to an understanding of the complex
and dynamic process of meaning making. Further, I have highlighted some parts of the DST view of
the self. An emphasis has been put on the self as “porous” with no clear boundaries between “inside”
and “outside”, and on the self as inhabited by both imaginal and real others. Related to the analysis of
post death presence experiences, the use of DST can offer several perspectives. In the following I will
point out three main aspects, which also relate to the three main research questions.
The first aspect corresponds to the research question: How do people make sense of their PDP
experience? When analyzing the sense making of the experiencer, I can—through the lens of DST—
look for different I-positions. The I-positions can be voiced as collective voices, as for instance,
religious traditions, western grief-theories or the voice of psychiatric diagnostics. They can also be
individual voices, as for instance the voice of a mother, a father, a friend or a colleague who has
expressed their view on post death contact, or other relevant beliefs, emotions or attitudes. The sense
making can, according to DST, be studied as voices, or as I-positions moving in space. The
movement or shift between different, and even contrasting, positions contributes to an understanding
of how apparently disharmonious beliefs, attitudes and emotions can exist side by side, and how they
can change through time and space. For instance, can the voice of a local pastor, the voice of a
religious leader, some passages from the Bible, the “I as believer in supernaturalism”, and the voice of
a psychiatrist, all be represented by different and contrasting I-positions in the same extended self.
Furthermore, these can move and change. The process of meaning-making, as seen through the
conceptual framework of DST, is open to different outcomes of the dialogue, where harmony and
disharmony, suppression and dominance can all take their place.
The second main contribution of DST to the analysis is the concept of valuation. Valuation relates to
the research question: What is the significance of PDP to those who experience them? By using
valuation as a concept, different valuations of the experience of PDP, with different emotional states,
can be elicited on the manifest level. The basic motives on the latent level can be used to understand
the role of PDP for a bereaved person, and will be discussed further in the discussion chapter.
The third main contribution of DST to the analysis is in relation to the research question: What
characterizes the PDP experiences? In DST the presence of the deceased is seen as part of the
extended self, and hence the relation between the living and the dead can be studied as meaningful, in
line with other relations. When it comes to the experience of PDP, the conceptual framework of DST
opens some analytical spaces between external and internal space, and between imaginal and physical
space. This part of the theory will lead to a critical dialogue with the material and with the next theory
I will present, namely the Continuing Bonds Theory.
81
3.2 Continuing Bonds Theory
3.2.1. Introduction to Continuing Bonds Theory
The Continuing Bonds Theory (CBT) has, since the mid 1990’s, marked a paradigm shift in
bereavement theory.88 As opposed to earlier grief theories where the aim was to sever the ties to the
deceased, this model emphasizes the opposite, namely to continue the bonds and the relationships89
after death. The background of the model is the growing amount of empirical research that has
become aware of the bereaved struggling to find a way of maintaining connection to the deceased
(Klass, Silverman & Nickman, 1996; Rees, 2001, Walter, 1996). According to these studies, as
presented in chapter 2, a large number of bereaved people do have evolving relationships with the
dead, and further, the relationships are not obviously and necessarily correlated with any mental
derangement or depressive illness.
Several researchers can be associated with the model.90 Two of the most influential theorists are
Dennis Klass and Tony Walter. Walter is a sociologist and a professor of death studies at the
University of Bath in the UK. Klass is professor emeritus of psychology at Webster University in St
Louis, Missouri. In 1996 Klass was co-editor91 of the book “Continuing Bonds: New Understandings
of Grief” which is often referred to as the starting point for the new grief model. The same year, Tony
Walter published an article, “A New Model of Grief: Bereavement and Biography” (Walter, 2006), a
contribution to the new direction in bereavement research in the UK. Both Walter and Klass have
written extensively on grief and death. They have also written together. In the Handbook of
Bereavement Research, published by the American Psychological Association, Walter and Klass are
the co-authors of a chapter which develops the Continuing Bonds model further (Klass & Walter,
2001). The chapter shows the two professor’s common view on the continuous bond paradigm.
However, when reading their extensive work, one can see that as a psychologist and a sociologist,
respectively, they use slightly different language and approaches when describing the model. Walter,
for instance, describes the bonds in relation to modernity and postmodernity, while Klass describes the
bonds as inner representations. Yet they agree on the socio-cultural perspective. Continuing bonds—
as integrated into the family, community and cultural bonds—are present in the texts of both Klass and
88
One of the leading bereavement- researchers, Margareth Stroebe holds that the continuing bonds model is more a
supplement to the older theories than a radical alternative, whereas Tony Walter—one of the architects of the new
model—maintains that even though there are elements of continuing bonds, both in classical texts and in other newer grief
theories, this model radically challenges the general opinion that the goal of grief is to ‘let go’ of the deceased, and that
grief is essentially an emotional affair that has to be expressed in order to find resolution (Stroebe, 1997; Walter, 1997). I
will in the following show some of the distinctions and nuances in the classical texts. Still, I find it appropriate to speak
about the change and shift in bereavement research.
89
The terms bonds, ties and relationships are all used in the literature, sometimes also attachment. As far as I can see, Tony
Walter most often uses bonds, while Dennis Klass uses both bonds and relationship.
90
Other choices could have been Silvermann, Nickman or Marwit.
91
Together with Phyllis Silvermann and Stephen Nickman.
82
Walter. Moreover, they both consider grief to be a cognitive as well as an emotional process. This
corresponds with the position taken by this research project as a cultural hermeneutical psychology of
religion, which can be said to focus on the nexus between culture and human psychic functioning
(Belzen, 2010).
When presenting the continuing bonds paradigm, I will primarily use the writings of Dennis Klass and
their common text. Tony Walter’s texts will be used mostly in relation to his new model of grief. I
will also add some references from other researchers where necessary to make my points clear. There
are several strands of research that fall under the umbrella of CBT, and some of these have already
been presented in the literature review in chapter 2.
3.2.2. The grief work paradigm and the continuing bonds paradigm
To get a better understanding of the CBT, I find it useful to first give a brief review of part of the
context in which it was developed: namely the cultural narrative of grief that dominated for most of
the 20th century in the West. As this narrative and the theories from which it departed still exist, and
as I will use some of the ideas in the discussion chapter, I provide some space to present this modern
grief work model before I outline the basic elements of CBT.
The modern idea of bereavement is often related to Sigmund Freud’s essay “Mourning and
Melancholia” (Freud, 1917/2009). Other theorists, like John Bowlby and Colin M. Parkes, followed
in Freud’s tracks with their publications on grief in the sixties, seventies and eighties (Bowlby, 1980,
Parkes, 1972; Parkes & Brown, 1972).92 Their theories soon took on a life of their own, being
extensively used by counselors, therapists and clergy. Concepts from the grief theories moved into
everyday language. Phrases such as “let go of the dead”, “move on” or bring “closure” could—and
still can—be understood as representing cultural views on how to reach a resolution of grief (Klass,
2006b).
Klass calls these twentieth century theories grief work models (Klass, 1996a: 17). By this concept, he
points to the common focus of these theories—although mutually varying—on the emotions within the
bereaved that have to be worked through in order to cut the bonds to the dead. According to the grief
work models, the task for the bereaved is to sever the attachment with the person who has died and to
form new attachments, to move on, and to live without the deceased. Grief is seen as largely an inner,
psychological process. The progress of grief occurs by expressing, working through, and in this way
resolving inner feelings. According to this model, feelings must be expressed, or else they will be
bottled up and cause psychic harm. Grief, as Freud saw it, frees the ego from the attachment to the
92
Theorists like Lindemann and Worden could also be mentioned.
83
deceased. Freud wrote: “When the work of mourning is completed the ego becomes free and
uninhibited again” (Freud, 1917/2009: 245/21). Further, he argued that “mourning has a quite
psychical task to perform: its function is to detach the survivor’s memories and hopes from the dead”
(Freud, 1913/2001: 61).
However, Freud’s later life and thinking didn’t fit easily around the resolution of grief as detachment.
His metapsychology described the tension between eros, the drive to union, and thanatos, the
tendency to separate and dissolve, but it was never translated into clinical practice, and never applied
to his theory on grief. Neither did his personal experiences with loss, which for him turned out to be
an impossible task to resolve in terms of finding new attachments, 93 integrate into the theory
(Silverman & Klass, 1996). Nor did Freud’s experience dominate subsequent formulations of
appropriate grieving behavior. The post-Freudian paradigm for understanding grief maintained the
idea that the primary goal is to cut the bond between the living and the dead so that new attachments
can be formed.
Silverman & Klass (1996), in an analysis of the 20th century grief-theories, argue that phenomena
indicating that survivors do maintain bonds with the deceased have been rediscovered many times, but
each time the insight has failed to be passed on and incorporated into the next generation of research
and theory.
Colin Parkes’ theory took into account the phenomenon of sensing the presence of the bereaved as he
observed interactions with the inner representation of the dead. He further considered it to be an
important element of the early stage of grief. It was however seen only a stage on the way to the goal.
The interaction served the function of frustrating the survivor, and by this, opening the way for the
survivor to relinquish the attachment to the deceased. Parkes saw no useful place for interaction with
the dead after the grief was resolved. According to Parkes, getting through the grief meant to break
the attachment (Parkes, 1972). He stated: “Identification with the lost person is one of the methods
that bereaved people adopt to avoid the painful reality of loss; as such it may delay acceptance of the
true situation” (Parkes, 1972: 105). However, Parkes and his colleagues’ data began to show that the
widows whom they studied were maintaining a continuing bond with their husbands.94 This was
reflected in the following:
93
Freud’s personal experience of grief did not support his theoretic model of grief. After important deaths, Freud seemed
unable to form new attachments, and unable to find the sense of transcendent connection that he seemed to think
necessary if his bond with the deceased were to be continued.
94
Glick, Weiss and Parkes wrote in a footnote “We are unable to give reliable figures regarding the incidence of the sense
of the husband’s presence. Direct questions were not at first asked on this subject, since we had not anticipated the
phenomenon” (Glick, Weiss & Parkes, 1974: 146).
84
In contrast to most other aspects of the reaction to bereavement, the sense of the persisting
presence of the husband did with time. It seemed to take a few weeks to become established,
but thereafter seemed as likely to be reported late in the bereavement as early. (Glick, Weiss &
Parkes., 1974: 147)
At that time Parkes did not, however, change his theory regarding the resolution of grief as a
consequence of this finding. He suggested that the motive for contact with the dead was a compulsion
to search for the lost figure, together with anxious yearning for the figure’s return (Parkes, 1972). The
restless energy that characterizes the bereaved was interpreted as a protest syndrome, which can often
take the form of scanning the environment for indications of the lost figure’s presence. Furthermore,
part of the protest syndrome was a level of tension high enough to defeat efforts to rest and sleep.
This was consistent with the idea that there had been the loss of a security-fostering figure (Weiss,
2001). In the 4th edition of his book “Bereavement-Studies of Grief in Adult Life” from 2010, Parkes
and Prigerson described the sense of presence, and what he termed hallucinations, and assured that it is
a common, normal and non-pathological experience. He also gave a chapter to the continuing bonds
and mentioned shortly the possibility for symbolizing continuities which is likely to become part of
the attempt to find meaning in bereavement (Parkes & Prigerson, 2010).
John Bowlby’s attachment theory was in many ways similar to Parkes’. In the final version of his
three volume study on attachment and loss (1969 – 1980), he continued the dominant model of grief,
arguing that all forms of mourning lead toward detachment. Yet he also argued: “half or more of
widows and widowers reach a state of mind in which they retain a strong sense of the continuing
presence of their partner” (Bowlby, 1980: 96). Bowlby recognized the data gathered by Parkes et al.
and tried to understand why observations about continuing bonds with the deceased had been largely
ignored. He used the data to point out that Freud was wrong, but did not amend his own theory
regarding the goal of grief (Silverman & Klass, 1996).
Walter suggests that in the classic texts there is a major theme emphasizing detachment achieved
through the working through of feelings, and a minor theme emphasizing the continued presence of the
dead and a continuous conversation with and about them (Walter, 1996). Clinical lore has emphasized
the major theme. According to Walter, this has to do with the secular and individualistic culture in the
modern west that is likely to discount the possibility of keeping multiple bonds and a meaningful
relationship between the living and the dead. The modernist and medical concern is to “return the
individual as rapidly as possible to efficient and autonomous functioning” (Stroebe et al, 1992).
Second, Walter points to the fact that the authors of the classic texts did not discourage this selective
reading of their work (Walter, 1996).
85
Summing up; the body of work from Freud to Bowlby and Parkes claims, that the purpose of grief is
the reconstitution of an autonomous individual who is able to leave the deceased behind and form new
attachments. The process by which this is believed to be achieved is the working through and
resolution of feelings. The attachment theorists within the grief work model presume that encounters
with the dead happen, but that these encounters are a means by which mourners search for the dead, as
a preliminary stage to a deeper understanding that they have truly died, which in turn is a preliminary
to the ultimate goal of letting go of the emotions that bind the mourner to the dead (Walter, 2007). As
an early searching behavior the sense of presence of the deceased is normal. As lasting encounters it is
dysfunctional. The Continuing Bonds Theory writes into this context, and brings the minor theme of
the classic texts into the foreground.
3.2.3. Continuing bonds and the goal of grief
The Continuing Bonds model re-examines the idea that the purpose of grief is to sever the bonds to the
deceased in order to free the survivor to make new attachments. Instead, the model focuses on
memorializing, remembering, knowing the person who has died, and allowing them to influence the
present. The goal of the grief process requires mourners to construct a durable, but not static, life
story that enables them to integrate memory and continuing interactions with the deceased into their
ongoing lives (Klass, 2006b).
In his 1996 article, Walter states that the purpose of grief is living with the dead. However, he admits
later that he is now less happy with using words such as “goal of grief” and “purpose of grief” than he
was when he wrote the article. He states that:
All we know is that a large number of bereaved people do have evolving relationships with the
dead and that this is not obviously correlated with psychological or physical malfunctioning.
Only God can pronounce that this relationship is grief’s purpose or goal. (Walter, 1997: 263)
Opposing the goal of the older grief models, and replacing the “letting go” with “keep hold”, has
brought clinicians and lay authors to believe that continuing bonds is a prescription for a good grief
resolution. Klass (1996a: 18) certainly proposes that “it is normative for mourners to maintain a
presence and a connection with the deceased.” However, in a later article he clarifies that it was not
his intention “to move continuing bonds from the harmful to the helpful list for the evaluation of grief”
(Klass, 2006b: 844). Continuing bonds do not in themselves support better adjustment. It is not a
simple line between cause and effect, such as continuing bonds cause healthy coping, neither are
continuing bonds the goal of grief. CBT has a descriptive element (that survivors do maintain bonds),
and it is found to be a normal way of grieving (continuing bonds is not necessarily correlated with
86
pathology). It is not meant to be prescriptive (Klass, 2006b). The move of continuing bonds from
pathology to normal is not necessarily a move to better coping and adjustment to grief.
When it comes to the last chapter of grief, which perhaps can be understood as the goal of the grief
process, Klass prefers to use accommodation as a more suitable term than recovery, closure or
resolution (Silverman & Klass, 1996: 19). Accommodation is a dynamic phenomenon. It is a
continual process because individuals and communities continually construct meaning in the
interchanges between themselves and their world. The emphasis is on negotiating and renegotiating
the meaning of the loss, and the meaning of the dead and absent—yet present—person in the life of
the bereaved (Klass, 1996b). As the model argues that ties to the bereaved can possibly continue
throughout the survivor’s entire life, this process actually may be life-long.
3.2.4. Continuing bonds and the process of grief
As discussed, in the grief work models the process of grief is to work through emotions. The bereaved
focuses introspectively and expressively on his or her feelings. The CBT, on the other hand, moves
the focus to the relation between the bereaved and the dead. This move is based on research into how
people continue their bonds with the deceased (Klass & Walter, 2001). However, it has also been
formulated into models for coping with bereavement—which elucidate adaptive versus maladaptive
ways of grieving. Tony Walter’s “new model of grief” (Walter, 1996, 1999), is not strictly a coping
model, but it describes the process as well as the purpose of grief in such a way that one can draw
hypotheses about adaptive coping (Stroebe & Shut, 2001). As Walter’s model allows space for PDP
experiences, I will describe its main features in the following section.
External dialogues
Walter formulates that the process of grief is to rewrite one’s life story in the light of the bereavement
one has experienced (Walter 1996). He further hypothesizes that to construct this story one can go
into internal or external dialogues. One can talk with the dead, or about the dead. To talk about the
dead is to turn to other people who knew the deceased, or to people in, for instance, a bereavement
group. These interactions help to construct an understanding of who the deceased was. It puts
different pieces of the story together. Through the conversations one can attempt to complete the dead
person’s identity, to write the last chapter of their biography. Even if talking does not help adjustment
in terms of recovery from distress, it does help in the process of biography construction. The
biography helps to relocate the dead in the ongoing life of the bereaved.
87
Walter & Klass argue that the fragmentation of modern life, particularly the split between home and
work, may leave parts of the story about the dead unknown to the mourner (Klass & Walter, 2001).
Hence, telling the deceased’s story may be particularly important in contemporary secular societies.
The story doesn’t need to be true, or agreed upon, but it has to be good enough for practical purposes
(Walter, 1997).
The ease with which these conversations can take place is influenced by cultural norms. Klass and
Walter (2001) provide the example that in the Jewish Shiva one is expected to discuss the deceased. If
the dead may be addressed, there are rules about how they should be included in conversation. In
Britain one is supposed never to speak ill of the dead and many people are unwilling to mention the
dead if they think it will possibly upset others.
Even if culture allows the dead to be talked about, social and geographical structure may inhibit this.
In this case, bonds with the dead can be continued internally by the bereaved individuals.
Internal dialogues
Internal conversations can be conversations with other people (not physically present) about the dead,
or they can be conversations with the dead. When discussing the latter, Klass and Walter are
approaching the phenomenon of PDP. Both Klass and Walter have written on the sense of the
presence of the dead, as well as about the conversations one can have with the dead, either at the
graveyard, at home, or in other places. Walter states:
In the newer ‘continuing bonds’ paradigm, however, grief evolves into finding a place for the
deceased in the ongoing life of the living; within this framework, contacts with the departed
may be a normal and ongoing part of mourning (Walter, 2007: 99).
This corresponds with the model’s focus on grief as a relational phenomenon. Grief is about the
relationship between the survivors and the person who has died, and the relationship among the
survivors (Klass, 2006b). In life intimate relationships are developed and sustained through physical
contact and through everyday conversation. When the relationship continues after death, one might
expect to find ongoing conversation with and about the dead.95 Thus, in contrast to those grief work
models where the emphasis is on feelings, the CBT puts weight on talk and on the relation between the
living and the dead.
95
Little research has however been done into the extent to which people talk to the dead.
88
Internal dialogues, such as talking with the dead, can be acted out in therapy in order for the bereaved
to work with the biography of the deceased. Then, CBT is used as a coping model. However, internal
expressions of CB can also be unintended, as for instance spontaneous PDP experiences, like sense of
presence, or visual or auditive perceptions of the deceased. In the CBT, the PDP phenomenon is seen
as one of several expressions of continuing bonds. Klass states:
Phenomena which indicate interaction with the inner representation of a deceased person are: a
sense of presence, seeing, hearing, smelling, touching, or talking to the deceased; belief in the
person’s continuing active influence on thoughts or events; or incorporation of the
characteristics or virtues of the dead into the self (Klass, 1999: 40).
Klass uses the concept inner representation to denote the relation to the deceased. When it comes to
sensing the presence of the deceased, Klass states that this interaction may have the character of both
outer and inner reality. It is not simply an objective presence, for the meaning of the experience is
strongly personal. Neither can it be said to be simply subjective, as it is not experienced as something
inside the head (Klass, 1999). Further, inner representations and inner dialogues are not simply
individual matters. They are maintained and reinforced within families and other social systems, for
instance by placing pictures of the dead in the living room, going to the cemetery and speaking
positively of inner dialogues (Klass, 2006b).
3.2.5. The nature of the bonds
The CBT emphasizes the still present bonds to the deceased. I will now turn to what is meant by the
concept of bonds, and how we can understand the bonds to be established and maintained.
The continuing bond as an inner representation of self and other
Continuing bonds are generally understood to mean an ongoing inner relationship (Shut et al, 2006:
752). Klass argues with that, and writes that this position may exclude the idea that the bond remains
integrated in the family or community bonds, and in the social and cultural narratives (Klass, 2006).
However, he recognizes that there is an inner system that continues to be centered on the person who
is no longer present. This inner system can be seen as an inner representation, on certain premises.
An inner representation is, in Klass’ words, an “inner social reality that the mourners can call on in
difficult times, that comforts them in their sorrow and that provides a means by which they can access
89
their better self in their new and poorer world” (Klass, 2006b: 288). The bond with the dead can
accordingly be understood as a mental representation of self and other, together with the feelings
associated with these representations. “The contents of the inner representation are the
characterizations of thematic memories we have of that person. But the representations also include
those parts of ourselves that are actualized in our interaction with that person” (Klass, 1999: 40). Thus
parents will bring their parental behavior into their inner representation of their dead child.
Klass draws on researchers linked to object relation theory, such as Fairbarn and Rizutto, when
defining an inner representation (Klass, 1992). In accord with Fairbarn, inner representations are
defined by Klass as (a) those aspects of the self that are identified with the deceased, (b) characteristics
or thematic memories of the deceased, and (c) emotional states connected with those characterizations
and memories (Fairbarn 1952, in Marwit & Klass 1996: 298). Klass also states that the bonds are not
simply a mental construction, not just an idea or a feeling. Rather, the bonds include all levels and
modalities of experience: “Representations of people always include visceral, proprioceptive,
sensorimotor, perceptual, eidetic and conceptual components” (Rizutto 1982). The inner
representation is all that the dead person was to us when they lived, and who the person continues to
be to us now (Klass 1999).
Drawing on object relation theory with its roots in psychoanalysis, Klass distinguishes his theory from
the psychoanalytical notion of internalized object relations at certain points: According to Klass,
psychoanalytic theory does not, or at least did not,96 account for the nature and extent of the changes
that occur in the relationship between the living individual and the dead person who is represented
largely by mental constructs (inner representations). The problem with the idea of internalization of
the dead in psychoanalytic grief theory, according to Klass, is that it was seen as only a preliminary
stage to “letting the dead go.” Secondly, it was seen as “frozen,” and thus unhealthy Klass seems to
agree with the evaluation of frozen internalization as potentially unhealthy. But, as he states, this may
happen in the same way between living persons. Rigidity and dissociations within the self does not
depend on the living or dead status of the other, but depend on wider factors that facilitate health or
reinforce pathology (Silverman & Klass 1996). According to Klass, an inner representation is
dynamic and changing, as the meaning that person has in the life of the bereaved is changing through
time. At this point, Klass is in line with Rizzuto (1979), who suggests that inner representations grow
and change with the individual’s development and maturation. This dynamic view of representation
is, according to Klass, also present in the grief process when bonds to the deceased still continue years
after the death.
96
He admits that the psychoanalytic theory has become more flexible with regard to interactions with the dead in later
years (Klass, 1996a).
90
Some researchers have preferred to call the theory continuing relationships rather than continuing
bonds (Hays, 2011). The reason is that they think that relationships are more dynamic and changing.
They denote what is observed in bereavement research, namely that the relationship to the deceased
evolves and changes although the person has died (Silverman & Klass, 1996; Klass, 2001). Further,
relationships are formed out of all the events occurring between people, whereas bonds are the
emotional linkages that underlie these events (Weiss, 2001). Klass uses both relationship and bonds
when he addresses what is going on between the living and the dead. The notion of bonds and ties
originate with Attachment Theory. Klass acknowledges that Attachment Theory has structured much
of what we have learned about grief. However, he calls for a broader perspective on attachment bonds
to include family, tribe, nation and religion (Klass, 2006b).
Social and communal nature of continuing bonds
Klass claims that it is necessary to include the socio-cultural perspective in which the bonds between
the living and the dead are set. If we are to understand the nature of the bonds, and how bonds are
continued, we must go to the cultural stories of death, grief and mourning, and to the larger set of
values in a society. Klass and Walter ask:
What can we say about bonds between the living and the dead in a nontraditional and largely
secular contemporary society that values individual autonomy, youth and progress, and that
resists the notion of being guided by older, let alone deceased, generations? (Klass & Walter
2001: 435)
Our western society does not provide indisputable narratives to help the continuing bonds, as it has
emphasized severing ties to the deceased. Despite this lack of cultural encouragement, different
expressions of continuing bonds are still present in western society, such as sensing the presence of the
dead, talking with the dead, using the dead as moral guides and talking about the dead (Klass &
Walter, 2001). These expressions are, however, often experienced in private, and individually made
sense of. In terms of the latter, bereaved people today actually have more myths and symbols than
people had previously, because, in a pluralistic world, a wealth of potential cultural resources is
available. Yet, the multitudinous myths and symbols do not carry the indisputable conviction as in
previous times. This makes sense making more private and individual in terms of making choices
among the available cultural resources.
In contemporary western society many turn to friends and family, or to strangers in a grief group, with
whom they can share the grief, or they turn to memorial sites on the internet. When individuals and
91
communities find no rituals for maintaining contact with the deceased, they may develop their own
rituals or use a dialogue with the dead (Klass, 2006a, 2006b).
A web of bonds and meanings
Continuing bonds with the deceased are intertwined with other bonds and meanings the bereaved are
connected with. The meaning in the life of the bereaved will relate to the meaning of the relationship
with the deceased, to other people, and this again is connected to his/her global meaning or worldview. A loss may not only disrupt the coherence of the personal meaning by which individuals order
their life experience, it may also disrupt the global meanings or worldviews by which families and
communities interpret life events. The bonds with the dead are intertwined with the bonds we
maintain with other people, and with other unseen and transcendent realities (Klass, 2006b). They are
also connected to our worldview and situational meaning. Klass argues that the Continuing Bond
model is relational. It sees the individual as interdependent and living in a web of bonds and meanings
(Klass, 1999: 175, 2006b: 846)
How the universe works
Place and power of the self
Bond with the deceased
Bond with the transcendent
Meaning of the survivor’s life
Meaning of the death
Family, community, cultural membership
Figure 3.2.5. Web of bonds and meanings
92
This web of bonds and meanings is a more complex answer to the issue of causality between
continuing bonds and adjustment. Causality can move in many directions at the same time, and
adjustment to bereavement is, according to this model, a complex dynamic. The figure also illustrates
that, if there is a movement in one of the bonds or connections, other bonds will also move. One can
begin the description (in research) or start an intervention (in therapy) through the lens of any of these
bonds and meanings. In any intervention, or in any processing by the bereaved, changes at any point
of the web will lead to changes in the others (Klass, 2006b).
3.2.6 Continuing bonds and worldview
The web of bonds and meanings shows how continued bonds with the dead are not a separate category
of bonds. Relationships with the dead influence and are influenced by other bonds, for instance bonds
with the transcendent, which may be the dead, ancestors, the saints, the gods, or God. Sometimes the
lines between the dead and the transcendent angels or gods are blurred. When studying bereaved
parents in the US, Klass found that many of the parents developed a spiritual relationship to their
dead child. Although they fully knew that the child was dead, parents also thought that the child
remained immortal. They had experiences of the presence of the dead, and these experiences had
about them a sense of mystery, and a transcendent reality (Klass, 1999). Klass states that “like angels
and bodhisattvas, the spirits of dead children bridge the gap between transcendent reality and everyday
reality because they participate in both realms” (Klass, 1999: 39).
How the interaction between the living and the dead is understood, is influenced by the worldview of
the bereaved. However, Klass, with his model of web of bonds and meanings, also approaches it from
the other direction and looks at how worldviews are discovered and modified through the experience
of a continuing bond. Thus, interaction with the inner representation and maintaining or remolding of
a meaningful worldview, are dynamics in the accommodation to grief (Klass, 1992).
As reflected in the introductory chapter, Klass defines worldview as “beliefs, myths, rituals, and
symbols by which individuals and communities answer two questions: “How does the universe
function?” and: “What place do humans occupy within the universe?” (Klass, 1999: 126). The first
question asks about the power in a transcendent reality and its impact on the everyday world of living
people. It also asks if the transcendent reality is friendly, hostile or indifferent, and if it is consistent or
capricious. The second question asks whether humans have the power to affect their destiny, what
kind of power they eventually have, and by what means the power may be accessed. When people
answer those two questions, they do not necessarily find a worldview that is a coherent whole. On the
contrary, Klass states that people’s worldviews are not systematic. They are seldom subjected to
93
rigorous critical analysis. Worldviews are not constructed of cognitive beliefs only, but are embedded
in cultural and individual history, and “made of symbols woven deeply into the people’s self and
world” (Klass, 1999: 141).
Worldviews are further experiential in the sense that individuals use them to reorient themselves.
When someone dies, bits and pieces from new and old worldviews may help the bereaved to make
sense of a world which has fallen apart, and through the continuing bonds with the dead, worldviews
are maintained or remolded. In his study of bereaved parents, Klass categorizes five patterns of
change in worldview after the death of a child:
1. Retain the worldview one held before the death, which means being able to reinterpret the
death in ways consistent with the worldview.
2. Find a new and compelling worldview which fits the experience of death and continuing
bonds.
3. Reinterpret symbols in their worldviews, which allows them to assimilate the experience of
death.
4. Live with a divided self: To maintain bonds with the transcendent that are linked to the
deceased, while in other parts of life feeling cut off from any transcendent meaning.
5. Develop entirely new worldviews.
Worldviews can be simple or sophisticated, but regardless of the degree of development, or of
education or lack of education by the bereaved, the worldview is put through a test when experiencing
death. The test is not necessarily logical coherence, but if it has proved useful in hard times (Klass
1999).
3.2.7.
Continuing bonds as a conceptual framework for studying post death presence.
The core of the CBT is the recognition that people do often maintain a bond with the dead person, a
bond that can continue for decades, and which is not associated with measures of pathology.
The theory of continuing bonds is firstly a descriptive model that, within the context of bereavement,
states that a lot of people do have ties to their dead relatives or friends, and that this is not associated
with dysfunction. The theory describes the bonds, and the process of constructing and maintaining
bonds. Secondly, the theory is purpose-directed. It focuses on the purpose of grief, or the
accommodation, which is to make meaning of the continuous relationship. In this use of the theory
there are normative elements pointing to good grief and good grief outcomes. It is within this use of
94
the theory that it is employed as a model for coping with loss. Tony Walter’s new model of grief is
one example of this.
Thirdly, CBT has been used as prescriptive, as a recipe for good grief, stating that continuing bonds
will result in adjustment to bereavement. Klass opposes this last understanding, and proposes a more
complex model. Continuing bonds is in itself not a guarantee for adjustment. There are many other
factors to consider. Recent research tries to address this topic (see chapter 2).
Related to the present study of PDP, the CBT is, first of all, a theory that places the experiences of
PDP within a non-pathological framework. Secondly, it brings the relations between PDP, grief and
worldview under the focusing lens. Thirdly, when analyzing how people make sense of their PDP
experiences, and what the significance of these experiences are, CBT can draw the elements into a
conceptual framework. Specifically, I will use the typology of patterns of change in worldview when
analyzing what happens to the participants’ worldview through their PDP experience. Parts of the
model of web of bonds and meanings will be used when I analyze how people make sense of their
experience.
The coping model is not directly implemented in the analysis. It is the (more) descriptive and
conceptual elements which I will employ. However, the question of what is good adjustment to grief,
and the role of continuing bonds as expressed by PDP experiences, will be discussed in relation to the
question of the significance of PDP for the grief process.
3.3. Closing remarks
I have now presented two theories which, in different ways, provide perspectives on the experiences of
PDP and the related meaning making. These theories will be used partly as a conceptual framework in
the analysis, partly as a focusing lens for emphasizing particular themes, and partly as theories which
are subject to discussion in the light of the material and in relation to each other. This last use of the
theories will mainly be done in part III, the discussion chapter. A closer look at the relationship
between material, theory and research questions will be made in the next chapter, method and
methodology.
95
96
Chapter 4: METHODICAL COMPOSITION AND
METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Planning this research project has necessitated many choices, not least in terms of methodology. What
kind of strategy would be best? How should I analyze the material? What should the main “voice”
be? (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005: 194). In the introductory chapter I outlined the design as a “final
product.” I will now give space to the considerations which I have pondered along the way, in
dialogue with the field and with the methodological literature. This method chapter also provides an
opportunity to clarify and deepen the more sketchy descriptions of chapter 1.
The structure of this chapter is as follows: First I describe and discuss the research paradigm and
research strategy that I have chosen for the study. I then move on to an elaboration of how I gathered
the material through sampling (4.2.) and interviewing (4.3.), and further, how I analyzed the material
(4.4.). After that I will discuss the quality criteria applied in the study (4.5.), reflect on my role in the
research process in a section on personal reflexivity (4.6.), and finally define some ethical
considerations (4.7.).
4.1. Research paradigm and research strategy
4.1.1. Introduction to IPA as a research strategy
As reflected in the introductory chapter, the study is situated within the constructivist-interpretive
paradigm (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). It is further based on phenomenology and hermeneutics, as
developed through “Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis”, IPA (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009).
In the following paragraph I will clarify how I interpret the hermeneutical and phenomenological
approach in this project, and consider what this mean when researching experiences of post death
presence (PDP). I will also outline IPA as a research strategy, and discuss on what premises this study
may be called IPA research.
When searching for appropriate approaches, I came across IPA in a handbook of qualitative
psychological research (Willig & Stainton-Rogers, 2008). The strategy seemed relevant for the
phenomenon under investigation, fell within psychology, and corresponded to the epistemological
stance of the research questions in progress. As I wanted to ask for experience and meaning, a
phenomenological and hermeneutical framework seemed a natural choice (Smith, Flowers & Larkin,
97
2009). There are however several positions within phenomenology and hermeneutics,97 and there are
different opinions as to whether phenomenology should be seen as distinct from, or connected to,
hermeneutics (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 34). Tending towards the latter position, IPA theorists
are of the opinion that the two currents can be combined. They adhere to an interpretive version of
phenomenology, which emphasizes the hermeneutic approach, and which inclines towards theorists
such as Heidegger and Gadamer. Although the basis is still Husserl’s work, with its focus on the
importance and relevance of experience (Husserl, 1982), the phenomenology used in IPA has moved
away from the commitment to description (and transcendental interests) of Husserl, and towards a
position that holds interpretation as its primary goal98 (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). Accordingly,
IPA has been described as more interpretive than phenomenological, especially with respect to
methodological issues99 (Giorgi & Giorgi, 2008).
Phenomenology is concerned with the way things appear to us in experience, and IPA is
phenomenological in that it attempts to get as close as possible to the personal experience of the
participant.100 However, the IPA approach recognizes that inevitably this becomes an interpretative
endeavor for both participant and researcher (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 37). To use IPA is thus
to engage in double hermeneutics, “trying to make sense of the participants trying to make sense of
what is happening to them” (Smith, Flowers and Larkin, 2009: 3). The hermeneutic position is further
visible in the notion that understanding and sense making require engagement with one’s biases and
fore-projections (Gadamer, 1990/ 1960) when engaging in a dialogic encounter with the text.
As meaning making or sense making and experience are central to this dissertation, I will elaborate on
these concepts in the light of IPA. In the introductory chapter I described experience as a broad
concept, encompassing both the more immediate experience or perception (in Norwegian;
97
It is, however, not the only psychological approach combining ideas from phenomenology and hermeneutics. Other
related approaches are, for instance, Giorgi (1985), and Van Manen (2003). In contrast to Giorgi, who has developed a more
Husserlian phenomenological method that emphasizes description, IPA holds a more interpretive approach, leaning
towards phenomenologists such as Gadamer and Heidegger. Whereas Giorgi aims to discern commonalities in experience,
so that a general picture of a phenomenon, or an essence, can be built up, IPA aims to provide a detailed analysis of
divergences and convergences across cases, capturing the richness of each particular individual examined (Smith, Flower
and Larkin, 2009: 200). IPA has, in other words, a more microscopic lens, analyzing within a small set of accounts that hold
an ideographic and contextual similarity (Eathough & Smith, 2008). Van Manen tries to combine Husserl, Gadamer and
Heidegger. IPA moves away from the Husserlian perspective and toward the interpretive view. Van Manen is more
concerned with everyday experiences, whereas IPA typically (but not necessary) analyzes major life events and the making
of meaning (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009).
98
Husserl and Heidegger agree that both description and interpretation are legitimate approaches, but they differ with
regard to what is primary. Husserl claims that description is primary (from an epistemological perspective), whereas
Heidegger holds interpretation to be primary (from an ontological perspective), saying that description is a special type of
interpretation (Giorgi & Giorgi, 2008).
99
That is, it offers a flexible and iterative method for analysis, with an emphasis of “the positive process of engaging with
the participants rather than the process of bracketing prior concerns, in the sense that skilful attention to the former
inevitably facilitates the latter” (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 35). This will be elaborated on later, in the analysis.
100
According to Smith et al. (2009) pure experience is never accessible, as we witness it after the event, but we get as close
to it as possible.
98
“opplevelse”), and also the more reflective experience (in Norwegian; “erfaring”). I also described
experience as a process, although not linear. This can be seen in relation to what IPA describes as
“engaging in different layers of reflection”, from the “glancing at a pre-reflective experience”, to the
“attentive reflection on the pre-reflective” to a “deliberate controlled reflection”, where not only the
participant, but also the researcher, enters the reflective loop and becomes open to new reflections
(Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 190). These reflections can be accessed through people’s stories and
accounts, which again are accessed through language, and the process can ultimately be called
meaning making. Meaning making is not seen as a linear process, from the pre- reflective to the
reflective, but as a dialogical process, negotiated mutually. This idea is also clearly underlined in the
Dialogical Self Theory with its view of meaning making, as was presented in the theory chapter. The
hermeneutical stance of IPA implies a non-objectivist view of meaning, where meaning is not
discovered “out there” independent of the interpreter, but is produced through dialogue (Scwandt,
2000).
According to IPA, experience cannot be reached directly, but can be studied via an examination of the
meanings which people impress upon it. Meaning and experience are closely linked in the
understanding of the human being as a sense making creature, and thus meaning as sense making is
part of both the immediate experience (“opplevelse”), and also of the more reflected experience
(“erfaring”), but there are different degrees. Or, to put it another way: IPA is concerned with
examining how people make sense of their experience, and by this process develop the experience
(Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). Accordingly, IPA can be used to reveal something “of a particular
person’s understanding of their experience of a phenomenon” (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 195)
Relating this to the context of psychology, these meanings may in turn illuminate the embodied,
cognitive-affective and existential domains of the human being. Smith et al. state: “People are
physical and psychological entities. They do things in the world, they reflect on what they do, and
those actions have meaningful, existential consequences” (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009:34). In
other words, IPA focusses on the person’s life as it is lived and experienced. Linked to the lived
experience is the focus on cognition and emotion. Existential dimensions are present in reflections on
major life experiences as typical topics for IPA-research.
The psychological foci are, however, not on the expanse of the individual’s life-world, as it is socially
and historically contingent, and contextually situated. A core concern in IPA is Heidegger’s concept
of “Dasein” (Heidegger, 1962/2004), which is often translated as “being-in-the world” (Spinelli, 1989:
108). This refers to how the individual is enmeshed in the world with things and with others. A direct
study of “Dasein” is not possible, but it can be seen indirectly through the lens of cultural and sociohistorical meanings. When IPA focusses on a study of individual meaning making, it does not mean
99
that the individual cognitive and emotional aspects are the only units of analysis; relational and
cultural perspectives also come within the radar. Smith, Flowers and Larkin (2009) upholds that IPA
research is concerned with cognition and mentation. Cognitions are, however, not seen as isolated
functions, but as one aspect of being-in-the-world. One can also say that IPA research is an inquiry
into the cultural position of the person. It can reveal the individual’s positionality in his or her culture,
language and locale. As far as I can see, this perspective may be highlighted to a greater or lesser
extent within the IPA approach, and, as already reflected in both the introduction and the theory
chapter, I am concerned in this project with the participant’s cultural position, and with looking at how
cultural resources (or collective voices) are used in the process of meaning making.
Eathough and Smith (2008) place IPA at the “light end” of the social constructionist continuum. They
claim that in contrast to the more radical social constructionist approaches, which see the individual’s
life-world merely as a linguistic and discursive construction, IPA looks at people’s lived experiences
and their sense of self. Operationalized into the work of analysis, the IPA researcher will look for the
meanings of language for the person him-/herself, rather than focusing on the effect of language in a
broader context.
Describing IPA in a nutshell, Smith et al articulate that the focus is hermeneutic, contextual (an
interpretation of the meaning for a particular person in a particular context) and ideographic (Smith,
Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 195). I have already described the hermeneutical and contextual aspects.
The ideographic idea points to a focus on the particular. In research, an ideographic approach implies
an intensive examination of the individual. However, IPA also provides an opening to “climb up the
ladder of generality, seeking for universal structures but reaching them only by a painful step by step
approach” (Harre, 1979: 137, in Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). In contrast to another well-known
phenomenological approach, namely that of Giorgi, which aims to discern commonalities in
experience so that a general picture of a phenomenon, or the essence, can be built up, IPA aims to
provide a “detailed analysis of divergences and convergences across cases, capturing the richness of
each particular individual examined” (Smith, Flower and Larkin, 2009: 200). IPA has, in other words,
a more microscopic lens, analyzing within a small set of accounts (Eathough & Smith, 2008).
The ideographic approach, focused on examining particular cases, is also linked to an inductive mode
of inference, although the hermeneutic stance points to understanding as an iterative process, which in
practice means that the research process involves interplay, moving back and forth through a range of
different ways of thinking about the data, where theories also play a part. The inductive approach in
IPA is first of all linked to a distinction between different levels of interpretation. That is, IPA
operates at a level that is clearly grounded in the text, but the approach also moves beyond the text to a
more interpretative level. The emphatic reading will usually come first. This may then be followed by
100
a more critical and speculative reflection whereby the researcher builds an alternative narrative that
differs from the participant’s own account. One can go on to make more formal theoretical
connections with IPA, but it is important that this is guided by the emerging analysis (Smith, 2004).
Most of the interpretive levels employed in IPA are in keeping with the hermeneutics of recollection,
or restoration of meaning, but they also allow a hermeneutics of questioning.101 The researcher may
well ask questions and posit readings that the participants would be unlikely, unable or unwilling to
see or acknowledge themselves (Smith, 2004). This offers a deeper understanding of the participant’s
experience, but it also raises issues of ownership and power (Willg & Stainton-Rogers, 2008). I will
come back to this in the chapter on ethics.
Taking these characteristics together, one can say that an IPA analysis moves from the particular to
the shared; and from the more descriptive to the more interpretative. Although the analysis is always
interpretive, there are different layers and levels of interpretation – both for the participants and for the
researcher. Engaging in the different layers of experience and different levels of interpretation, that is
both in the material and in the research process, is at the core of IPA research (Smith, Flowers &
Larkin, 2009).
Hence, PDP experiences can, in the light of IPA, be seen as experiences with several layers of
reflection, from the first perceptions – although even these are guided by former experience - to the
more reflective experience after the PDP perceptions, and on to new reflections and interpretations in
the interviews. A careful examination of the individual, with an attempt to come close to their
experiences and meaning making, while at the same time being conscious of the researcher’s own
prejudices (Gadamer 1990/1960) makes this approach, in my view, both methodologically suitable and
ethically grounded when researching a vulnerable and controversial phenomenon.
4.1.2. The study in relation to traditional IPA research
So far I have followed the theoretical ideas of the IPA strategy, and I have also shown how IPA is
appropriate as a research strategy for studying PDP. However, there are some areas where my design
departs from a traditional IPA study. These mostly have to do with my theoretical interests, and may
at a couple of points apparently place my study at the edge of IPA. I will discuss this in the following.
The first apparent divergence is in sample size. Usually sample sizes in IPA studies are small, often as
few as 5-7 cases. This small number is linked to the ideographic approach that examines each case in
101
The IPAs notion of the hermeneutics of questioning has some similarities with Ricoueurs hermeneutics of suspicion as it
is questioning the “insider perspective”, but it differs from that in that it is not based on importing a reading from without,
but is based and built up on a reading from within the text itself (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009)
101
great detail. My sample of 16 qualitative interviews is larger than is usual for an IPA analysis, and it
inevitably makes the analysis of each case less detailed. The larger size has to do with sampling
participants in relation to their different worldviews and relationships with the deceased – which again
is linked to my particular theoretical interests (see section 4.2). Because one may assume that
differences in worldview will result in differences in meaning making, a broader sampling will
produce richer material. Sampling with some heterogeneity requires more participants, and in this my
study differs from the usual IPA study. However, according to Smith, Flowers and Larkin, IPA can be
expanded to analyze larger data sets (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). This will, of necessity, bring
less detail into each case and put greater weight on the analysis of the group. However, Smith et al
(2009) do state that there is flexibility in terms of the amount of detail in a particular analysis, and the
relative weighting of group to individual. What identifies an analysis as IPA is that group level
themes are illustrated with particular examples taken from individuals. If holding a larger data set, the
researcher should, according to Smith et al, support each theme with quotes from a number of
participants (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 182). I have carefully selected extracts from the
interviews to show how the individual experiences and makes meaning of the phenomenon described.
Thus, I will argue that even though the sample size is large, I have tried to retain some of the
ideographic approach of IPA through the analysis.
Related to sample size is the homogeneity of the sample. IPA researchers tend to select a “fairly
homogenous sample” (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). As I will discuss in the sampling chapter, and
have reflected above, the sample in this study could have been more homogenous. However, I opted
instead for some differences in worldview and in relationship to the dead among the participants. Yet,
all the participants had a fairly common experience of post death presence. The sample was thus not
selected to provide maximum variation (see section 4.2), but held a moderate homogeneity. As such,
it is not very far from the ideal for IPA. A more heterogeneous sample has some advantages in
making it easier to make judgments about transferability, and some researchers have even called for an
expansion of IPA research regarding its homogeneity (Pringle, McLafferty & Hendry, 2010).
The third issue where I may come close to the border of IPA is in my use of theories. IPA holds that
formal theories can be connected to the analysis, but that this often is not the case. If formal theories
are used, it is only after close textual analysis, and is guided by that. One should not invoke a
particular formal theory which is then read into the passage, but rather build up the theoretical
connections from a close reading of the material (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). In the analysis
chapter, I have, in some paragraphs, used the Dialogical Self Theory (DST) to structure the material,
and thus given headings according to the language of that particular theory. In the text, DST serves
the function of a conceptual framework. However, this theory was not brought into the study until late
in the process of analysis, and hence the process was more inductive than the headings may appear.
102
Overall, I have tried to hold a close textual connection in the analysis, and have not invoked theories
that do not match that. However, theories do play a fairly prominent role, as I also have a theoretical
discussion in the last chapter.
Smith et al. do not point to their approach as a recipe, but rather as an outline, with flexibility and the
possibility for creative solutions and bolder designs. Relative to their quite open approach to IPA,
and the reflections above, I will - despite the issues discussed here – place the study in IPA.
Having placed the study within a research strategy and a research paradigm, I will now turn to how I
collected the material through sampling and interviewing, and reflect on the choices that I made along
the way.
4.2. Sampling
4.2.1. Sampling strategies
The sampling strategy was perhaps the issue that gave me the greatest concern. I had several
questions, both before and throughout the sampling process. In the following I will try to present a
transparent picture of how I went about selecting and recruiting participants for the study.
In order to stay consistent with the qualitative paradigm102 in general, and the interpretive
phenomenological analysis (IPA) in particular, I applied purposive sampling strategies (Smith,
Flowers and Larkin, 2009). Purposive sampling was used to ensure that those sampled were relevant
to the research questions (Bryman, 2008). In the case of this study, the aim was to select participants
who could offer insights into the PDP experience and its related meaning making. In order to recruit a
relevant sample, I used different criteria (Miles & Huberman, 1994).103 That is, all the cases had to
meet certain criteria in order to be included in the study. The criteria were related to the research
questions and the conceptualization of the phenomena of the study.
When setting up the criteria I had to consider the degree of heterogeneity or homogeneity of the
sample. In qualitative research one often pursues sampling based on maximum variation (Bryman,
2008). Maximum variation sampling serves the purpose of collecting material which can say
102
Usually qualitative research employs purposive sampling, but probability methods may also be used, although they are
not very common. When using probability sampling, it is often significant if the qualitative researcher generalizes to a wider
population (Bryman, 2008).
103
Selection criteria is one of several sampling strategies used in a typology described by Miles & Huberman (1994).
103
something about diversity across different cases, or see “whether main patterns hold” (Miles &
Huberman, 1994: 28). As I have already reflected, IPA research normally goes in the opposite
direction and tries to find a fairly homogenous group of participants. The logic of IPA is that, if one
holds the group as uniform as possible, according to obvious social factors or other theoretical factors
relevant to the study, one can examine in detail the psychological variability within the group.
However, the extent of the homogeneity can vary from study to study. For instance, if the
phenomenon of inquiry is very rare, one can be more selective about which factors to consider for
homogeneity (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). Studying PDP which is not very rare, but is still not
an experience found among all people, made it necessary to keep the criteria more open in order to
find relevant participants.
According to the IPA approach, making a decision with regard to homogeneity/heterogeneity is partly
an interpretative problem (How much variation can be contained within an analysis of this
phenomenon?), and partly a practical problem (Who can I get hold of? How much time and effort will
I be able to spend in order to find the right persons?) (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 1009: 49)
There is, however, another problem with homogeneity/heterogeneity strategies, namely to what degree
they feature essentialist elements. Both maximum variation sampling and homogeneity case sampling
can run the risk of an essentialist understanding of certain concepts. If concepts or factors – be they
diverse or narrow - are treated as fixed, one may lose some of their nuances and dynamics. In my
study, I was, for instance, considering the degree of homogeneity/heterogeneity in the type of PDP
experience and the worldview of the participants. Both PDP experiences and worldview are, as I see
it, difficult to put boundaries to. Hence the question of how to circumscribe them within useful
criteria became an issue for consideration.
I will now trace how I developed the inclusion criteria, based on practical and interpretive
considerations, together with my desire to keep a dynamic and open view on some of the key
concepts.
4.2.2. Development of inclusion criteria
When starting to work with the sampling, I found it difficult to know how narrowly it was possible to
design the study and still get hold of enough volunteers. This uncertainty was obviously due to the
fact that you never know who will be willing to participate, and the impossibility of spending years
finding the right persons. It was, however, also due to a lack of research on the phenomenon in
Norway. Although I could make some guesses, based on international studies and my own
104
experiences,104 I didn’t know the population of PDP experiencers in a Norwegian context. Hence, I
decided to start with some fairly broad inclusion criteria, with an openness to narrow down once
contact with the field was obtained. The criteria were:

Experience of presence of a deceased friend or family member

The contact is experienced directly – not through a medium

The participant is not working as a medium

Minimum of 6 months from the death to when the interview starts

The participant has not been admitted to a mental hospital
The two first criteria have been reflected in the introductory chapter, and are related to the
conceptualization of PDP. The criterion of not working as a medium was added to avoid too much
focus on “professional” PDP experiences with dead people other than the experiencer’s own family
and friends. The time span after the death was added mainly for ethical reasons, to avoid coming too
close to a difficult situation. It was also built on knowledge from international studies suggesting that
PDP experiences can happen several years after a loss. The last criterion was included to try to find a
non-clinical sample (see section 1.5).
As responses from the field were coming in, I considered whether to adjust the sample to a narrower
group, either in terms of the type of PDP experience or in terms of the type of worldview, or in terms
of the type of loss, the three focus points of the research questions.
The decision regarding type of loss was made first, and related mostly to the focus of the study. One
possibility was to select a particular type of relationship to the deceased, for instance being a spouse,
or to restrict the study to sudden and violent deaths. This would have been particularly relevant if I
were mainly to analyze the outcomes of grief. 105 However, in my explorative study focusing on PDP
experiences, I found it to be beneficial, and easier in terms of access, to go for a “moderate
homogeneity” which included all types of relationships, but with the limitation that the dead person
was a family member or friend. I reasoned that a moderate homogeneity could give some variety to
the material, as well as being narrow enough to facilitate a more fine-grained analysis.106 I therefore
decided to stick to the original criteria of the deceased being a family member or friend. Yet, I had to
have in mind that, since a lot of factors are involved in the grief process, a limitation or variation in the
104
I had some experiences from alternative milieus in Norway, and had met people who told me of PDP experiences, and I
had been following the media and weekly magazines highlighting the phenomenon which helped me to guess, but I still did
not have an overview of the Norwegian population in relation to the phenomenon.
105
See literature review in chapter 2
106
After having done the interviews I realized that several of the participants referred to sudden, dramatic or young deaths.
105
type of death and type of relation to the deceased does not necessarily directly affect the homogeneous
vs. heterogeneous feature of grief.
To decide on the type of PDP experience was more complicated. As reflected in the introductory
chapter, the concept of PDP experiences includes both the quasi- sensory sense of presence and the
full perceived sensory experience of seeing, hearing or being touched by the dead. It can also include
the experience of the deceased communicating through a sign, for example by leaving an object
somewhere, extra vivid dreams and “death bed visions”. I was most interested in the perceived
sensory experiences, but as I didn’t know whether enough people with such experiences would be
available, I approached the field more broadly in the first place. Another feature of PDP that I had to
take into consideration was the frequency. Should I look for people with recurrent experiences, or was
it enough if the PDP was experienced only once? As I wanted to have “intensive cases” (Belzen,
2010), my “ideal sample” (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009) would consist of people with repeated
experiences, and with perceived sensory experience. However, once in contact with the field, I could
see that by studying only sensory experiences I would leave out important nuances and make too
closed a focus on the experience. Ideally, then, I wanted at least one sensory experience, combined
with an openness to other kinds of PDP perception. After some dialogue with the field, I saw that it
was possible to add the following criteria:

At least one perceived sensory experience
The criterion of repeated experiences was not followed throughout the sampling. In order to meet one
of the other criteria, namely to have a moderate spread on worldview, including people defining
themselves as non-religious, and this was not very easy to find, I decided to add one participant with a
single experience.
When it came to worldview, I considered whether to adjust the sample to one particular religion, for
instance, to interview only Christians. Greater homogeneity in terms of worldview, I reasoned, would
possibly give more detailed data with regard to how the experience could or couldn’t be integrated into
that particular religion. However, as I see worldviews as more hybrid and dynamic, I found it difficult
to put boundaries around one group. In practice, it would be hard to decide who should be in and who
should be out of the study. On the other hand, I wanted to make some kind of circumscription in order
to retain some homogeneity, and therefore needed to articulate a criterion. I ended up with looking for
participants who described themselves as Christians, alternative, (new) religious, folk religious,
spiritual and non-religious, in different combinations. Hence, I added the following criterion:
106

Participants with Christian, alternative, and/or secular worldviews - in different combinations
This criterion was also made on the basis of sociological studies of religiousness and religions in
Norway, which feature the Protestant Christian Church of Norway as the largest religious community,
but with a growing alternative group, and also, in more recent years, an increase in non-religious
people (Botvar, 2010; Botvar & Henriksen, 2010). I did not include other religious groups, such as
Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims etc. Neither did I try to sample people from the Sami population in
Northern Norway. This was done in order to not spread the sample too thin.
As I have shown, some of the decisions regarding sampling were difficult to make before getting in
touch with the field.107 Hence, I chose to evolve the sampling once the fieldwork had begun - as
suggested by Miles and Hubermann (1994: 27). I will now describe how I recruited the participants.
4.2.3. Recruiting participants
Participants were recruited through referrals (from various kinds of gatekeepers), opportunities (as a
result of my own contacts), and snowballing (which amounted to referral by participants), a fairly
common way of approaching the field in IPA research (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009).
I started by contacting deacons employed in the Church of Norway. The deacons were chosen as
referrals because they were assumed to have a broad local network, and specifically to be working
with bereaved people, through, for instance, bereavement groups. To get in touch with the deacons, I
asked the advisors of diakonia (in Norwegian: diakonirådgivere) at the offices of the various dioceses
to give me a mailing list of deacons in their diocese. Some of the advisors were impossible to get hold
of and two of them refused to give me a mailing list. I finally contacted the deacons from six dioceses.
Several deacons mailed me back, saying they had relevant information. However, some of the
potential interviewees were considered by the deacons as inappropriate or unethical for them to
contact, due to the particular counseling situation in which the deacons had heard of the PDP
experience. Eventually, approximately fifteen possible participants were selected by the deacons.
After talking to the deacons and using my inclusion criteria, I ended up with 5 persons whom I
contacted. In line with my aim of moderate homogeneity in terms of worldview, I also contacted The
Norwegian Humanist Association (NHA, In Norwegian: “Humanetisk Forbund”) in order to possibly
107
I had conducted 4 pilot interviews, but those 4 participants were picked from people I knew of, and who fell partly
outside the emerging inclusion criteria, and these interviews did not really give an indication of the range of experiences in
the larger field.
107
contact some non-religious participants. Although extraordinary experiences are not particularly
highlighted in the NHA,108 my contact person was open, and tried to find potential interviewees. It did
not, however, result in any new participants. I then contacted three key people in the more defined
alternative religious unions: the “Holistisk forbund”, “Alternativt nettverk” and
“Spiritualistforeningen.”109 These contacts gave me three more participants. One of them was,
however, taken out of the sample after the interview, as I realized that she did not fill the inclusion
criteria in the way I had expected.110 The rest of the participants were recruited through my own
contacts and through snowballing.
The interviews mostly took place between December 2010 and June 2011. Because the sampling was
still evolving when the interviewing began, and because I depended on other people to contact some of
the participants, the process went slowly, and interviews were spread out over time. During the
summer of 2011, I was introduced to the possibility of a new participant by a friend of mine. As this
participant was, by my referral, said to be an atheist, I decided to contact him in order to fill out the
moderate homogeneity I had aimed for concerning worldview. The process of finding a date for an
interview took quite a long time as the participant was busy. We finally made an appointment for
January 2012. In the meantime, I had been introduced to another apparently non- religious potential
participant whom I contacted. The sampling process was closed in February 2012. At that point there
were 16 participants.
Age and place of living were not criteria in the sampling. In order not to have too many criteria, and
thereby to create still more problems with finding the right participants, I left out age and geography,
as I considered these as less important than the other chosen criteria. After the sampling was
completed, I ended up with an age-range spreading from people in their 20s to their 80s, with all
decades represented, and with people from different parts of the country. I had hoped to get some
balance as regards gender, but as very few men responded, the final sample consisted of 4 men and 12
women. Why the majority of respondents were women, is not possible to say. One can, however,
speculate that it may be linked to research suggesting that although males also have PDP experiences,
they may feel more reluctant to discuss their experiences (Daggett, 2005). It may also be linked to the
idea that there are more women in holistic milieus, (Woodhead, 2007), and in spiritualism (Mehren,
2011), or to the existence of “feminine discourses” within the alternative milieus (Kalvig, 2013),
108
NHA denies supernatural understandings of reality. «Humanismen avviser overnaturlige oppfatninger av virkeligheten».
(www.human.no, read 15.11.13)
109
I will emphasise that the strategy of contacting deacons, alternative group representatives and the NHA, was not
designed so as to group the participants as Christian, alternative and secular. The interviews also showed that the
worldviews were more mixed and hybrid than that. It was rather to start with the moderate homogeneity I had decided on.
110
In the interview I realized that the participant worked as a medium, something I wasn’t able to pick up during the
telephone conversation before the interview.
108
which possibly hold men back from responding. However, this does not apply to all the participants in
this study, as they would not generally be identified as holistic, spiritualistic or alternative. It could, of
course, also be accidental.
4.2.4. Sampling quality
Anyway, quite apart from the predominance of women, who wants to participate in a study that
requires the presenting of a personal experience that is possibly controversial in parts of society? Will
this mainly be people with positive experiences, like PDP enthusiasts and promoters? Or is it,
perhaps, people who need to share their experience for different reasons? As I telephoned each
participant before we met, and also as some commented during the interviews, I built up an impression
of their motivations for taking part in the study. Some said that the topic was important, and that they
wanted to contribute to research on a phenomenon which to a large extent was neglected. Others said
they appreciated that someone would approach the phenomenon in a “serious” way. One of the
participants had been contacted by some (glossy) weekly magazines,111 but she had refused to speak to
them for fear of ridicule. She asked me questions on the telephone to make sure that this was a
“serious” project, and would not give her story negative exposure. Some expressed, either before or
after the interview, that they were glad to be listened to, and that they appreciated that the project
“gave voice” to their experience.
It might be true that volunteering for this research project does produce a bias towards positive
experiences. But it doesn’t need to be that way. One could also anticipate that some could have been
interested in using the situation to warn against the phenomenon. One can speculate on what the use
of a third person, and not an advertisement where the participants would have contacted me directly,
did to a potential bias towards positive experiencers. Based on their responses, I can at least say that
some of the participants never would have responded to an advertisement, but took part because a
friend or contact asked them to do it. As will be visible in the analysis, the participants were not only
enthusiasts.
To sum up: The selection of participants is based on methodological, conceptual and practical
considerations. It developed through dialogue with the field. I have tried to give as transparent a
picture as possible of the process and of my considerations along the way. Now I will turn to the next
step in constructing the material, namely the interviewing.
111
Not because she was a famous person, but because of her extraordinary experiences and psychic abilities.
109
4.3. Interviewing
4.3.1. Semi-structured interviews
In the introductory chapter I described and reflected on the choice of the interview as the method for
collecting and constructing data for this study. I will now expand on that theme and discuss some
issues related to the interview form, interview agenda, and the practice in conducting the interviews.
An important factor in opting for a suitable method was the method’s potential to obtain “rich data”. I
wanted the participants to have the opportunity to tell their stories, to speak freely and to unfold their
ideas and concerns at some length. One-to-one interviews—in contrast to, for instance, focus group
interviews—were, to my view, the best way to allow rapport to be developed. The participants had
time and space to think, to speak and to be heard (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009: 57) which in turn
facilitates rich data.
I opted for a semi-structured question format. Thematically, the semi-structured interview can give
flexibility and openness to unexpected answers from the interviewees; but also—as compared to an
open unstructured interview—it is easier to keep a track of the themes I want to focus on, and later to
structure the interview in the analysis. Dynamically, open questions may help interviewees to
elucidate the dimensions he or she find important, while they also give the interviewer the opportunity
to follow up, or to lead towards certain themes (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009). One can see the semistructured interview as on a continuum between the structured and the unstructured interview, where
there exist different possibilities for stretching towards one end, or the other (Eathough & Smith,
2008). It is difficult to place my interview-style on one spot on the continuum, but perhaps I can say
that most of the interviews fell a bit closer to the unstructured than to the structured. The 16
interviews I conducted all turned out differently, as some of the interviewees had more to say and to a
larger degree opened up novel areas, whereas others related more to the questions I posed, which made
me stick closer to my schedule (although their relating to my questions didn’t mean that I omitted to
probe for more information). However, I wanted to allow the participants a strong say in where the
interview went, an approach crucial for the phenomenological endeavor in the IPA (Eathough &
Smith, 2008).
4.3.2. Interview agenda
Working with the interview agenda, I conducted four pilot interviews with some people I knew, or had
heard of. The interviews were used to moderate and change the interview questions in line with
responses from the interviewees, and it gave me some practice in my role as an interviewer.
110
In line with the semi-structured question format, the interview guide contained several questions
intended as a check list (see appendix.). Possible follow up questions were written in small types.
Probes (Can you say more about that?) and prompts (What do you mean by [for instance] “open up”)
were used along the way, and hence were not visible on the written schedule. The interview agenda
was influenced by my theoretical position in phenomenology and hermeneutics, as an IPA inspired
study. This position points towards open questions like How do you experience..? How do you
understand…? What does it mean to you… ? The agenda was further influenced by one of the theories
I had in my pool of possible approaches, and which was later chosen as one of the theoretical
components of the framework, namely the Continuing Bonds Theory. The Continuing Bonds’ focus
on grief was the departure for questions like: What does the contact you experience mean for your
grief process? However, I started with the open question: What does it mean to you? in order to stay
close to the primary research question (see section 1.3.3.). After that, I asked the more narrow and
theory informed question of what it meant to their grief. The relation between the open and the more
narrow questions will be elaborated further in the analysis chapter. Previous research showing the
need to look at the relation between grief and religion/spirituality was the point of departure for the
question about worldview. As I have already said, I did not know the Dialogical Self Theory before
the interviews started, and hence this theory did not shape the interview agenda. I was, however,
aware of the need to make the interviews contextual, and so I included questions like: How was it
where you grew up? Have you seen similar phenomena in the media? Do you know anyone else who
has similar experiences? Finally, questions in the interview guide were formed by the debate in the
media. As a discussion around contact with the dead, sparked by princess Märtha Louise’s statement,
was covered in depth in the media just some months before the first interview, I chose to address how
the participants experienced reading about the discussion.
The interview guide was structured around the research questions on 1) characteristics of the
experience, and meaning making, divided into 2) sense making and 3) significance, and translated into
interview language which gave the following main interview questions:
1. When did you first experience a contact with/ presence of xx? When was your last experience?
Can you describe your experience?
2. How do you understand what you have experienced?
3.
What does it mean to you to feel the presence of xx?
111
4.3.3. Conducting the interviews
Before starting the interviews, the participants were briefly presented with the main three questions. I
said that I would ask them to tell about (1) their experiences, (2) how they understood their
experiences, and (3) what the experiences meant to them. For ethical reasons, I wanted the
participants to know more specifically what they were taking part in before they agreed to participate.
So this brief introduction was conducted over the telephone, and repeated when we met, right before
the interview. I further stressed that their stories did not have to follow a certain sequence, and
emphasized that the order of my questions could vary according to how they wanted to tell their
stories, and that the interview would just follow whatever way was natural for them. I started off by
asking if they could describe the first time they experienced PDP. This was in order to make a more
comfortable start, as I assumed it would be easier to recount an episode than answer a question about
understanding. As expected, the order was mixed—something which also had to do with the close
relationship between the questions. When an interviewee had given answers incidentally to a question
I had not yet asked, I summarized at the end, saying something like: “You have already elaborated on
this theme, but perhaps you have something more to say?” And then I asked the original question.
Usually, the participants had something more to add. As previously mentioned, the interviewees
differed in the degree to which they related to my questions. Some started to speak before I had been
able to sit down and turn on the recorder, while others were more dependent on my questions. The
overall impression was that all of the participants gave rich and elaborate stories in their own way.
The questions were not asked in exactly the same way across the interviews. The phrasing was
tailored in relation to how I felt the participant was responding (Smith, Flowers, Larkin, 2009). I tried
to make the questions as open as possible, and stick to that, also in the follow ups, unless it was
important to check if I had understood what the interviewees intended to say. In IPA it is important to
avoid questions that interpret what has been said, other than just to clarify if the researcher has
understood it correctly. However, one can also argue, in keeping with IPA, that the interpretive
process starts during the interview, and Kvale and Brinkman’s (2009: 136) term “interpreting
questions”, although they are mainly intended to clarify, can be seen as part of that process.
Despite the nice plan with open question, I could see—when reading through the interviews—that in
some situations I had asked leading questions at the wrong time. However, and fortunately, the
participants did not always follow my lead, but often started on their own agenda, regardless of my
questions. In the analysis chapter I have included my questions in several of the verbatims in order to
show how the participant co-conducted the interview together with me as a researcher, thereby adding
to the transparency of the research process. I have explicitly made note of when the participants
started off without my having asked.
112
Another challenge I sometimes experienced was to what extent I should follow with empathy or
prompts when the interviewee told a dramatic and emotional story. With this sensitive, and to some
extent controversial topic, it was obviously important to establish a relationship of trust and rapport in
order for disclosure to occur. Some participants told me things that they had never told anyone else.
This had to be treated with care. On the other hand, I had to be careful with overly emphatic
statements, as they could be leading to the participant, and also slow down the pace in such a way that
we would not reach through to new questions. In this way the research interview differs from a
therapeutic conversation, and my challenge was to find a line between closeness and distance. I
considered whether it was necessary to help participants to contact professional help, but as far as I
could see, all of them had a close network, and some already had contact with, for instance, a
psychologist or doctor, and there was no need for further professional help.
Twelve of the 16 interviews were conducted in the participant’s home. First of all, I think this made
the interviewee more comfortable. Further, as the PDP experiences often took place in the same living
room where we were now sitting, I got an impression of the spatial placement and material artefacts
that the participants told about in the interviews. When they said that they could see the deceased in
this particular chair, and I saw the chair, or they pointed to pictures on the wall, I became closer to
their stories. The four other interviews either took place at the participant’s office (two participants) or
in a quiet café (two participants). This was done for practical reasons, considering the wishes and
convenience of the participants.
The interviews lasted from one to three hours, and when transcribed they amounted to 320 pages.
4.3.4. Tape recording and transcription
All the interviews were taped on an mp3 player, and transcribed as soon as possible after they had
taken place. Unfortunately, three times the mp3 player ran out of battery life. In one case I was able
to reload the player and the interview recording could continue. In the other two cases, I had to take
notes during the last part. I sent the whole transcribed interview back to these two interviewees, and
asked them to look over the particular paragraphs that were based on notes and give their comments.
Neither of them wanted corrections. One had a lot of comments concerning other parts of the
interview, so in her case, giving no corrections on the last part clearly didn’t mean that she hadn’t
taken time to look it through. Two of the participants claimed that the dysfunctional mp3 player was
due to the dead “playing” and interfering with the electricity – in their view a common happening.
113
As the aim of the analysis was mainly to interpret the meaning of the content of the participant’s
account,112 I did not write a very detailed transcript where I made a record of the exact length of
pauses and all non-verbal utterances, as is favored for instance in conversation analysis (see Hayes,
2011). Neither did I make coded representations of non- verbal expressions, except for using dots like
this … if the participant stopped in the middle of a sentence and started on a different one. Pauses,
laugher and crying were marked with notes, like this (pause). I kept the literal account through the
whole process of analysis, but as I will discuss in section 4.7., I modified the verbatims that were
chosen for illustration in the text. This was done for ethical reasons, and to make them more readerfriendly and the English interpretation easier. When omitting a passage from the transcript in the
illustrating citations, I marked it with (…). The passages were omitted for the case of anonymity or to
shorten the citation.
4.3.5. Sending back the interviews
All the participants were invited to read through the transcript, and all said yes to the offer. Three of
them sent me some comments about aspects they wanted to correct. These were minor corrections
regarding places, dates and relationships that they wanted to be right. One participant sent a
handwritten four page letter in return. These responses were added to the interviews, and marked as a
response. They did not, however, play a large part in the analysis as there were only minor comments.
Some months after the transcripts were sent, one of the participants, who I fictitiously have named
Liv, called me. Liv had read through the interview account and felt a bit uneasy, being afraid she had
told too much. However, one day an idea came to her: What if she asked her dead son what he thought
about her interview, and what he felt about disclosing private parts of their common history? Liv
followed up by contacting a medium and through the medium Liv experienced receiving a reply from
her deceased son. What she then happily told me in the telephone was that her son was applauding
what she had been doing, and thought it was just fine to give voice and publicity to such an
experience. Liv was then comfortable with what she had said, and accepted the transcript.
The interviews were sent back in order to validate the transcription and give the participants an
opportunity to correct what he or she had said during the interview. I explained that the written
accounts in the dissertation text would be less oral in their expression, and might be modified to a
more coherent version if there were many half sentences.
112
As I will later discuss, I did make some linguistic comments in the analysis, but this was done more on an ad hoc basis.
114
4.3.6. Interviews as co-construction
Having reflected on how I composed the material through the interviews, I will describe how I view
the interviews, and how they were treated in the analysis. According to Silverman (2006) interview
data can be treated in roughly three ways: first, within a positivistic frame, where the data are
considered as having the potential to give access to “facts” about the world. Second, they can be
viewed in the light of emotionalism, where the interviewees are seen as subjects who actively
construct their social world. The interviews are thus perceived as generating data which give an
authentic insight into people’s experiences. The third way is that of constructionism, where the
researcher takes as his or her topic how meaning is co-constructed, together with the researcher.
According to this view, research interviews are seen as a dialogue where different aspects are
developed. Thus, an interview does not give direct access to the experiences, but instead offers
indirect representations of those experiences (Silvermann, 2006).
Holding a constructivist ontology, although at the “light end,” the last of these positions provided the
appropriate lens through which I would treat the data. However, this approach can be in danger of
saying “anything about any other reality than the interview itself” (Silvermann, 2006:131) and the
interviews, rather than the topics of the interviews, may be the resource for the interpretation. In
accordance with the IPA approach, and my own interests, I have tried to keep the focus on the themes
which the interviewees are presenting, but at the same time give some comments on how they can be
understood as co-constructed, together with me, as the interviewer and researcher. I see the interviews
as an interaction, and as only partial in their scope. They provide a snapshot of the participants’
attempts to make sense of their experiences (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). Their understandings
are not the truth, but they are seen as meaningful, and I recognize them as originating from the situated
concerns of the participants.
This brings me on to an analysis of the material, although I must comment that the process of analysis
had already started to be described through the transcription phase.
115
4.4. Analyzing the material
4.4.1.
IPA as analytic strategy
The choice of IPA as the overarching research strategy, also offers some more specific tools to the
analysis. It gives a way of analyzing qualitative data in a systematic manner, with a focus on
exploring the participant’s experience and meaning making (Smith & Eathough, 2007). Opting for a
particular approach to data analysis, such as the IPA, provides some advantages, but may also pose
some challenges. On the one hand, IPA provides a framework and process for data analysis that is
consistent with the theoretical underpinnings. On the other hand, while this lends coherence to the
research design, it may reduce flexibility. However, despite its specific theoretical framework, IPA
promotes itself as a flexible approach open to adaption. It is also characterized this way by others
(Giorgi & Giorgi, 2008). Although IPA offers methodological guidelines for the identification of
themes, it does not specify how, or even whether, these ought to be linked theoretically (Willig &
Stainton- Rogers, 2008). It is further possible to combine IPA with other approaches,113 a possibility I
didn’t follow systematically in this dissertation, but it is worth mentioning as it illustrates that IPA has
a flexibility and openness to be extended in different directions.
When doing the analysis of this study, I took Smith, Flowers and Larkin’s (2009) step by step
approach as my starting point. In line with what the authors of IPA emphasize themselves, namely
that their suggested steps are not a recipe, I used it more as a toolbox where I picked what I found
relevant and useful for analyzing the material at hand.
4.4.2.
The initial phase
Shortly after each interview took place, I made some notes about my impression of the interviewee,
my role as an interviewer, some ethical reflections, anything I had failed to address, remarks made
before and after the interview while the mp3 recorder was turned off, and anything else that seemed
significant or interesting. After transcribing all the interviews, I selected some of my notes,
particularly what was said on the telephone when arranging the interview, and what was said when the
mp3- player was off, and wrote it on the same document as the transcript. All the participants were
then invited to read the transcript, including my added notes, and as earlier referred to, all said yes.
As the timespan from the first to the last interview was quite long, this initial phase of analysis was
stretched out. One may easily think that this brought about a more researcher led and interpretive
113
For instance, with Foucauldian discourse analysis or narrative analysis (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009)
116
stance in the latter interviews as the responses from the interviewees could potentially amplify or reify
the interpretations I had made in the analysis so far (Flowers, 2008). However, in this particular year
when the interviews and transcriptions took place, I was working with other things besides this PhD
thesis, and therefore I did not start a systematic analysis until the last interview had been conducted.
An initial analysis was, however, inevitably happening along the way; that is; the transcription and
initial thoughts. This naturally influenced the interviews that followed.
4.4.3. The systematic phase
After all the interviews were transcribed, I started re-reading them. I listened to the tapes once again,
correcting inaccuracies in the transcript, and adding some more notes. This stage involved slowing
down, and immersing myself in the text (Smith, Flowers and Larkin, 2009). Repeated re-reading of
the transcript also allowed the interview structure to develop, and helped me to gain an understanding
of how narratives can bind certain sections of an interview together, in a particular case.
After completing the above process, I had to decide whether to continue to make more systematic
notes on a case-by-case basis, or whether to break up the narrative flow and code into the software
program N’Vivo. In line with their ideographic approach, Smith, Flowers and Larkin (2009)
recommend starting with the former process. Practically, this meant making a copy of the transcript
with wide margins for adding thematic, linguistic and conceptual/interpretative comments in order to
develop suggestions for emergent within-case themes. I started to make systematic comments on a
case-by-case basis, but as my data set is quite large, I soon realized it would be less time consuming to
do these initial comments in tandem with the N’Vivo encoding. Accordingly, I took one case, made
my ‘within-case’ comments, and then encoded the interview into N’Vivo. I then moved on to the next
case.
The nodes or codes were quite close to the material and to the participant’s own words, but some also
reflected my own interpretation, which, in turn, was influenced by theoretical assumptions. For
instance, the code “continuing relationship” which covers the stories about the dead communicating
with, helping etc. the living in the same way as they did when they were alive, alludes to the
theoretical concept of continuing bonds. The aim, according to IPA, is to create the codes with
enough particularity to be grounded, and enough abstraction to be conceptual (Smith, Flowers and
Larkin, 2009). I think the results in my coding were more differentiated, with most of the codes being
very close to the participant’s language, while a few were more abstract. In N’Vivo there is the
possibility of making “tree nodes”, which I used increasingly. While making tree nodes, I also moved
into the next step which is to search for connections (e.g. creating superordinate themes).
117
After completing the software-coding, I started to look for connections, such as similarities and
differences, and for patterns of abstraction (bringing together themes that are alike, and developing a
superordinate theme as a name for the cluster), contextualization (highlighting constellations of
emergent themes that relate to particular narrative moments or key life events), numeration (taking
account of the frequency with which a theme is supported) etc. This step facilitated the move to a
more theoretical level of inquiry as I recognized that themes that were particular to individual cases
also represented instances of higher order concepts that several cases shared (Smith, Flowers &
Larkin, 2009).
The process of seeking to identify connections and patterns, both within a single interview and across
cases, can be seen as an iterative process, a hermeneutic spiral whereby “the analyst moves back and
forth between individual elements of the text and the whole text in many cycles” (Tesh, 1990: 68 in
Ayres, Kavanough and Knafl, 2003). I looked at a single word in relation to the sentence in which the
word was embedded, a single extract in relation to the complete text, one interview in relation to the
whole research project, one single episode in relation to the complete story etc. (Smith, Flowers and
Larkin, 2009). For instance, there were different reflections among the participants in my research
project regarding the relationship between the PDP and grief. In order to obtain a deeper
understanding of this meaning-making, I had to look at the statements in the larger “within- case”
stories. In other words, what could I find out about the participant’s experience and understanding of
grief, the relationship with the dead when he or she was alive, the particular story of death, the
particular context (s) in which the participants make meaning and so on. After doing this, I looked to
see if this produced any common themes. Hence, the analysis parsed the narrative in two different
ways: in terms of the important generic themes in the analysis, but also in relation to the life- world of
the particular participants who told their stories (Smith, 2004). The two ways of parsing the
narrative, in terms of generic themes and in terms of life- world were, in practice, a back and forth
process, driven by associations within the framework of the more systematic analytical strategy.
Although the analysis was mainly thematic, I made some linguistic comments where the specific use
of language by the participants was commented on. This was done ad hoc, and was guided by the
themes I analyzed. In the analysis chapter I have written linguistic comments in some places where I
find them relevant.
After I had written through the analysis chapters, and had sketched the discussion to follow, I went
back—sometimes all the way back to the transcript—as I identified some new connections. This was
a more theoretical interpretation, where formal theories were also used to structure and conceptualize
the material.
118
4.4.4.
The use of theories
Moving on to a theoretical interpretation, and the use of theories, I must first clarify that I see theories
in a broad way as a “more or less systematic and coherent account of a phenomenon, or a system of
phenomena” (Afdal, 2010:10). This broad understanding of the concept makes it possible to include
theories on different levels of abstraction and also with a variety of coherence and systematization.
The concept of theory can extend from grand theories or paradigms through to substantive theories
relating to specific phenomena, groups etc., and all the way down to scientific accounts or findings
that are close to the material (Bryman, 2008). When using the concept of theory in this broad sense,
one can also say that theories exist within the material. The material consists of “everyday theories”
(Afdal, 2010: 10) embedded in the reflections and actions of the participants. These everyday
theories are the more or less systematic, conscious and explicit accounts of the participant’s social
practice and meaning making which offer available bits of formal theories. Hence theory is not
something that is added on, but exists in the middle of the phenomenon to be studied. For instance,
when one of the participants says that “I was of course in a special state of mind” in his reflection on
the PDP experience, he indicates a theoretical account of what happened.
As in scientific theories, there is no direct relationship between the phenomenon and everyday theory.
Theoretical language always includes an interpretation of the social phenomenon. According to this,
the self-interpretation of the participants was analyzed and interpreted in light of their context and
collective frameworks—in order to explore the links that build their theories and meaning making.
However, as mentioned in section 1.4, I also carefully brought in more formal theories and
established dialogue between the participants’ everyday theories or interpretations, and the more
formal and scientific theories. This can be said not only to be a double interpretation (Giddens,
2003), but a third interpretation, relating to scientific theories (Bryman, 2008).
Formal or scientific theories were present from the beginning to the end. The research questions,
particularly the secondary research questions, were constructed in dialogue with different theories, the
interview guide as well. However, the theories were subject to change, rejection and sharpening along
the way in dialogue with the research community, and with the field. In line with the IPA position, I
tried not to invoke theories that were not grounded in a close textual analysis.
In IPA research one can introduce formal theories in different practical ways. One way is to invoke
theory when discussing the findings from the analysis. In this version the theory does not influence
the analysis in an explicit way, but is invoked post hoc. A variant of this is to identify a range of
potential theoretical perspectives from which the data could be interpreted before the analysis, but to
refuse to privilege any single perspective in advance. But one can also choose one or a few theories a
priori, using them to inform rather than drive the analysis (Storey, 2007). My process was a
119
combination of all these three possibilities. As was already said in the paragraph on interviewquestions, one of the theories, the Continuing Bonds Theory, was with me all the way, but I was open
to reject it if it didn’t match the analysis and interpretation. The Dialogical Self Theory, on the other
hand, came in later in the process, and did not inform the interview guide, but structured the analysis
at a later stage. Some theories, presented in the literature review at a more empirical level, were
introduced post hoc. The theoretical dialogues were hermeneutical in their interplay between theory
and material, and everyday theories in the material.
The theories in the analysis will be used as a focusing lens (Dressman, 2008) to highlight and amplify
different aspects of the data and to structure the material. These theories are further brought into the
discussion chapter and there will have the function of a dialectical scaffold (Dressman, 2008), with
the purpose of challenging or revising some of the concepts through a presentation of the findings.
To sum up: I have tried to describe and discuss the methodological choices made, and procedures
selected along the way. I have reflected on what I did, how I did it, and why I did it. My aim has been
to give a transparent picture of the process of designing and carrying out the study, and through that to
show the qualities, but also the weaknesses within the project. I will, however, also present a
paragraph providing some further reflections on the quality of the study.
4.5. Quality criteria
There is a discussion among qualitative researchers about the assessment of quality in qualitative
research, and if concepts as validity, reliability and generalization, originating from the quantitative
domain, can be used in qualitative projects. Many qualitative researchers are dissatisfied with being
evaluated in relation to criteria originally applied to quantitative research, a discontent which has
resulted in different alternative guidelines for assessing quality in qualitative studies (Smith, Flowers
& Larkin, 2009). For instance in Guba and Lincoln’s (1981, 1983, 1989) seminal work reliability and
validity are substituted for by the parallel concepts of trustworthiness, and authenticity.114 These have
been used and developed further by many qualitative researchers. On the other hand, some researchers
are concerned that introducing parallel terminology and criteria marginalizes qualitative inquiry from
mainstream science and scientific legitimacy (Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, & Spiers, 2002). It is
114
Guba & Lincoln’s concept of trustworthiness contains four aspects: credibility, transferability, dependability and
confirmability. Within these are specific methodological strategies for demonstrating qualitative rigor, such as the audit
trail, member checks when coding, confirming results with participants, peer debriefing, negative case analysis, structural
corroboration and referential material adequacy (Guba & Lincoln, 1981; Lincoln & Guba 1985; Guba & Lincoln 1982). Later
they developed the authenticity criteria (Guba & Lincoln, 1989).
120
possible, they assert, to apply the terminology originating from quantitative research, but with a
content accommodated to qualitative inquiry (see Kvale & Brinkman, 2009).
More than the choice of concept from one or the other domain, I find it important that an
understanding of the concepts is tailored to meet the subtle features of qualitative research. If the
criteria are too simplistic, and work only as checklists for what has been done, for instance to mention
that one has used audit trails, negative case analysis etc., they do not necessarily imply quality in
research.115 The fact that those strategies have been used does not equate with their having been done
in a good way (Morse et al 2002; Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009).
Another important issue is that the quality criteria should be used all the way through the research
project. According to Morse et al. there has been a shift from constructive (during the process) to
evaluative (post hoc) procedures in reporting quality (Morse et al., 2002). In line with the constructive
ideal, the coming chapter will take shape more as a summary of what I already have reflected on in the
method chapter than as an extended discussion, although some issues do need to be elaborated further.
To summarize quality criteria, I will use Yardley’s principles as they have been implemented by
Smith, Flowers and Larkin in the IPA context. Since it is the IPA approach I am relating to in this
project, I will refer to Smith, Flower and Larkin’s account and application of Yardley’s principles as a
starting point for a reflection on quality in my own study. The principles are broad, and point towards
a variety of ways of establishing quality. They adhere to assessing the quality of the qualitative
research along the way, but also to the implications of the study. According to Smith, Flower and
Larkin (2009), Yardley’s criteria can be applied irrespective of the particular theoretical orientation of
a qualitative study. The suggested principles, according to Yardley are: sensitivity to context,
commitment and rigour, transparency and coherence, and impact and importance.
Regarding sensitivity to context, Yardley argues that a good qualitative research study will be sensitive
to the socio-cultural milieu in which the study is situated, the existing literature on the topic, and the
contextual matters which can be found in the material, and also to the contextual situation of the
interview. I have tried to show this throughout the dissertation text, by writing a contextual chapter,
and by showing how I have asked the participants about their milieu in the interviews. In the analysis I
have been transparent with verbatims, including those of myself as the researcher, and those of the
interviewee, in order to give an impression of the contextual situation of the interview (Smith, Flowers
& Larkin, 2009).
115
Some have argued that the quality work has progressed towards “easy-to-use checklists” against which a qualitative
paper can be assessed – developed from the examples of Guba and Lincoln, like negative case analysis, peer debriefing etc.
121
Rigour refers to the thoroughness of the study. This can be seen in the appropriateness of the sample
to the question under consideration, in the quality of the interview, and in the completeness of the
analysis undertaken (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2009). A thorough analysis, grounded in the text, not
only describing but also moving towards an interpretation of what it means, is one of the quality
criteria I have tried to pursue. Further, I have attempted to sample the participants carefully, to match
the research question, and also to adhere to the principle of relative homogeneity in IPA. Giving the
transcription back to the participants, with an openness to their comments, is also part of striving for
rigour. Moreover, I have let my supervisors and research group on the psychology of religion look at
some of the interviews and suggest interpretations. The latter could, however, have been done in a
more extensive and systematic manner, for instance, another researcher could have looked through the
coding to see what she deduced, and I could have used a co-researcher in the analysis. The analysis,
as it is, is based mainly on my own interpretations, which may be a weakness in terms of
thoroughness. On the other hand, having more researchers involved would have raised questions
about whether an interpretation is reliable only if it is made in consensus (Kvale, 1997). I have tried to
make the analysis chapter transparent so the reader has a chance to evaluate my interpretations. In
some places I have written out an alternative interpretation. Being positioned in the hermeneutic
tradition, the dissertation is based on the view that the interpretations depend on our changing horizons
and the different questions we ask (Bernstein 1983: 139), and as such there is never a finally correct
interpretation, but there are different interpretations, and one has to consider which one has the best fit
and applies to practical knowledge (Schwandt, 2000).
Regarding transparency, I have attempted to describe as clearly as possible the different stages of the
research project. For instance, in the sampling chapter, I have attempted to give the reader a view into
the process of sampling used, and the decision trail, instead of just presenting the results of the
sampled participants. Likewise, in the interview, transcription and analysis, I have reflected on my
own role and my pre-understanding of the phenomenon. I have also tried to show how the
interpretations have been made, and in some places I have given alternative interpretations for the
reader to consider.
The coherence refers to whether the themes hang together logically. By presenting a thorough
description of the different theories, the research questions, the research paradigm, and how it is
linked, but by also discussing the ambiguities, I have tried to demonstrate the coherence of the project.
The reader may judge whether I have succeeded. I have worked continuously with the design of the
study, have presented it several times at research seminars, and have made corrections which have
improved the coherence of the design.
122
The last criteria, impact and importance, are related to whether the piece of research is telling
something important or useful. A study of PDP experiences is venturing into people’s major life
experiences, and as such it is important for those involved. But the aim is also to transfer the findings
and interpretations beyond the sample. This is not meant to be a quantitative empirical study,
generalizable to the broad population, but is understood to have theoretical transferability. This being
the case, my aim is that the reader should be able to make links between the analysis, their own
personal and professional experiences, and the claims in the existing literature. The effectiveness of
the IPA study is judged by the light that it sheds on its broader context (Smith, Flower & Larkin, 2009:
51). I have accordingly made my contribution to research by relating this study to the existing
literature. Moreover, as is visible in the contextual description, there is a need to understand PDP
experiences better, not only among researchers, but also in clinical situations, whether in
psychotherapy or pastoral care, and also for all people who, in one way or another, encounter this
phenomenon. Several times during the process I have been in contact with practitioners, whether
through conversation or through lectures and seminars I have conducted. In this way I have developed
an impression of what kind of knowledge is needed.
4.6. Personal reflexivity
In line with the qualitative and hermeneutic approach of this project, the personal reflexivity of my
role as a researcher needs some elaboration. In the introductory chapter I reflected on my personal
journey towards choosing and forming the project. Here I will move beyond that, and discuss my role
in the research process, as I encountered the participants in the interview setting, and the material in
the analysis.
Concerning the proximity or distance of the researcher from the field, I can say that in one way I was
not totally unfamiliar with the experience before the interviews started. I had talked to people—
mainly at the Alternative Fair—who had sensed the presence of a dead relative or friend, and I had
talked to mediums. But, I have never experienced PDP myself, neither have I sensed any other
extraordinary experiences. As such, I stand at a distance. When the participants asked about my own
opinion, I presented myself as curious and open. Some asked directly whether I had experienced PDP.
In those situations I chose to answer the question, even though it is recommended that the researcher
should be restrictive with his or her own experiences in the interview setting (Smith, Flowers &
Larkin, 2009). The reason that I did was to build a comfortable and relaxing atmosphere, and since I
could honestly say that I didn’t have any agenda pushing me towards judging the experience as either
123
good or bad, I think this disclosure didn’t make the participants hold back with their own accounts. I
also hope that my position towards the field was good in terms of not being too close and hence
“homeblind”, while at the same time having some familiarity, which perhaps made me better able to
catch some points and follow these up during the interviews, although I would not claim that I
managed to follow up at the right places in all situations.
Being a researcher, and at the same time a theologian and an ordained pastor in the Church of Norway,
researching a phenomenon which is controversial both in the Church and in academia, calls for a
reflection on how my own position could have influenced the study. Given the normative statements
from church leaders, visible in the media right before the interviews were taking place, I decided to
avoid presenting myself as a theologian and an ordained pastor in the Church of Norway. I was afraid
that the participants might withhold reflections that they might think would be deviant from the norms
they would assume I had. However, this way of presenting myself, or of not presenting myself, was a
bit old fashioned, as I discovered. Of course, some of the participants had found out my profession
through google or other internet pages. Others asked during the interview. If they asked specifically
about my connection to the Church, I answered that I was a priest, but now working as a researcher
and I emphasized that I was not researching the topic as a prolonged arm of the bishops, and that my
only agenda was to stay open to their experience. At the time of the interviews, I had not yet
published regarding this phenomenon, so they were not able to know my stand though the internet. As
reflected in the interview chapter, I was careful to establish trust and report, and to show empathy with
their stories. I think the interviewees were able to express themselves, but one can see in the
interviews that some participants related to my worldview when they presented their own. One can
also see that some negotiated with a rational voice, which could be from the media, from people they
know, but which could also be related to me as a researcher, and as a possible sceptic towards
extraordinary experiences. But it could also go in the other direction, with their assuming that I was
positive towards the phenomenon of existing dead souls, as one of the participants said in his comment
after he had read through the interview:
“I have read it and I lend my name to the content. However, possibly, it seems like I have gone a bit too
far in order to accommodate to you. It may have to do with closeness in time to what is felt as strong
experiences for me, and that I accordingly have been carried away due to my own feelings and my
vanity”
When analysing and discussing the material, it has been an important strategy for me to recurrently
ask myself if there are reasons for my wanting the findings to go in one or the other direction. Do I
benefit from presenting a result which is controversial in the church, and through this to be able to
present striking results? Or, on the contrary: Am I afraid of the findings being too deviant from what
is commonly accepted in the Church? This form of “researcher – management” (Engelstad, 2003)
involving the pressure of being politically correct unless it affects further possibilities, or of feelings of
124
obligation towards the Church, may influence the analysis, for instance in terms of what I choose to
highlight. One may also over-identify with (some of) the participants, and thus put undue weight on
some findings and overlook others (Kvale & Brinkman, 2009). I have tried to be aware of these
possibilities, and have tried to be honest with myself. In the practical research process I have aimed to
show nuances in the material, to ask for reflections that give both positive and negative interpretations
of the PDP experience, and to sample people with different worldviews. The reader may judge to
what extent I have succeeded.
The framing of the phenomenon, and the responsibility for which analytical categories and theories are
used, also has ethical consequences. For instance, in the case of PDP experiences, the phenomenon
can give quite different results if one measures grief symptoms, as compared to asking the participants
about their subjective experience of grief. In the following section I will elaborate further on the
ethical considerations of the project.
4.7. Ethical reflections
As the research questions and interview guide asked for sensitive personal information, such as
religious views and health,116 the project was referred to the Norwegian Social Science Data Service
(Norsk Samfunnsvitenskapelig datatjeneste, NSD). Permission to carry out the study was received in
September 2010, some months before I started to search for participants. Anonymity and informed
consent to participation were followed in accordance with instructions from NSD. I will elaborate on
that in the following section. The ethical perspective does not however, refer only to considerations
related to following the rules from the NSD. Rather, ethical research practice needs to be monitored
throughout the entire research process; and as the reader may have realized, I have touched upon
ethical reasons for my choices throughout this methods chapter.
4.7.1. Informed consent
When recruiting participants, research ethics dictate that it is crucial to obtain informed consent. This
is emphasized in the Personal Data Act, in Norwegian: “Personopplysningsloven” (see
www.lovdata.no/). The consent from the participants must be voluntary and informed. 117 In addition,
116
117
Personopplysningsloven §2 no. 8 a and c
“Voluntarily consent from the research participants is absolutely necessary” (Nurnberg-codex, in Ruyter, 2003)
125
it should be easy to withdraw from the study at any point. However, voluntary informed consent is a
fragile construct. Even though the researcher has opened the possibility for the participants to say no,
and to withdraw from the study, an unambiguous “yes” may not be given (Ruyter, 2003).
In this project there were three points at which the participants were informed about the project and
invited to participate. First, they were briefly informed and asked by the “gatekeepers”, or my
contacts with whom they, in different ways, were acquainted (see sampling section 4.2). One can
question whether being asked by people they knew made the participants more or less likely to say
yes. Perhaps some felt an obligation towards a helper, or a friend, and that made it easier to answer
positively rather than negatively? Or perhaps the opposite was the case, and they felt freer to say no
than if I had asked? It is not possible for me to know the motivation behind all the consents, and
although some of the participants stated clearly that they wanted to take part in the project because
they found it important to contribute and “give voice” to their experience, I still cannot be sure to what
degree the consent was deliberate. However, what can be said is that all the participants were allowed
time to think. Saying yes initially, led them to a telephone conversation with me, where I orally
informed about the project, asked them again, and also checked if they fitted the criteria for
participation in this particular study. I emphasized the voluntariness and the possibility of
withdrawing. After this selection, all the participants read a letter of information, and signed it. They
could choose whether they wanted the written information sent by post, or if they were comfortable to
read it through and sign it when we first met. Almost half of the participants wanted the letter to be
sent to them beforehand, and half of them would rather read it through when meeting with me.
4.7.2. Anonymity
Another important crux is the anonymity of the participants. In order to maintain anonymity, the data
were stored as prescribed by the NSD. All directly identifiable information about the participants was
connected to the interview by a code, and these were stored in a different place. The mp3 files and the
transcriptions were protected by password on the computer. All the participants got a pseudonym.
When presenting interview transcripts to my supervisors and fellow PhD students, the extracts were
made anonymous in terms of name and place, and I also omitted certain passages. When deciding on
the form for presenting the participants in the thesis text, I had to balance the methodological need for
transparency with the ethical need for anonymity. One consideration was, for instance, if I should
connect the participant’s profession to their interview. This would increase the transparency and make
it easier to get a picture of each participant, but would decrease their anonymity. I ended up by
describing the participant’s profession, as a lot of the material related to their professional life, and it
was in some cases crucial to an understanding of the text. But I made the professions as broad as
126
possible. For instance, I said “working in a church”, which can mean a lot of different professions,
and different churches. Similarly, I described their place of living as east, west, north and south of
Norway, instead of being more specific regarding which town they currently lived in (See chapter 5).
4.7.3.
Risk of harm
Important in research ethics is to consider the risk of harm for the individuals and groups who are
subjected to the research (Ruyter, 2003). During the research process it is important to ask if the
participants are exposed in any way that could be perceived as offensive or harmful. One must also
ask whether the group—in this case, people with PDP experiences—could become stigmatized
through the presentation in the text. As the phenomenon of PDP is controversial, and has been subject
to critical, and also condescending voices in the media, and as some of the participants are in
vulnerable situations due to the death of a close family-member or friend, it is important to cautiously
monitor the consequences of the interaction and presentation in the whole research process.
Participants might not have the opportunity to assess and choose carefully how much risk they are
willing to take for the sake of the research, and it is my responsibility to take into account such ethical
considerations along the way.
I have already reflected on ethical considerations in the sampling and interview process: For the
interview to be not less than 6 months after the death of the relative or friend of the participant; and in
the interview situation to build trust and rapport. The latter was important, also for methodological
reasons, but the ethical consideration of not harming the participant, and hence of carefully monitoring
the questions, was equally important. One example of an ethical consideration arose when one of the
participants told about her difficult relationship with her deceased father, a story which was obviously
painful for her to disclose, even though it was done on her own initiative. However, it was not her
father who was the subject of the PDP experience, but her dead husband. I wanted to ask what she
thought about experiencing the presence of her dead husband, and not her dead father. But there and
then I choose not to pose that question. As the lady was old and already thought that she soon would
die, I didn’t want to trouble her with thoughts of meeting her father, as she stated that she was very
happy that he couldn’t harm her anymore. One can, of course, debate whether I was too careful in
holding back. I acted on a hunch which told me to not push this topic further, and it was an ethical
choice that needed to be made there and then.
I have also been sensitive when describing and quoting the participants in the text. I have, for
instance, left out some small words like hmm.., ehhh.., kind of, sort of.. and some half sentences, in
order not to leave an impression of a person who is unable to express herself in a coherent way. The
127
premise is that the small words and starts on sentences didn’t have impact on the interpretation of
content. See the reflection on the transcript for an example of this.
The risk of harm is related to the benefit of the study being carried out (Ruyter, 2003). If it is done
with ethical considerations, it may give respectful attention to a phenomenon which has had some
stigmas attached to it. This may in turn be beneficial for the participants, a thought that was expressed
by many of them as their motivation in taking part in the project. The choice of frame for the study, in
terms of philosophy and methods, is done with this ethical awareness in mind. IPA, with its sensitive
elaboration of people’s meaning making, is, as I see it, well suited to that task.
4.8. Closing remarks
I have now discussed the methodical and methodological choices which I have made through the
research process. I have tried to be as transparent as possible for the reader to learn on what premises
the following analysis is built. I will now turn to part II which is the analysis of the 16 interviews.
128
129
130
PART II ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
The analysis of the interviews is divided into five main parts. The first part (chapter 5) gives a short
presentation on each of the participants. The next part (chapter 6) is a cross-case analysis where I
look for the different characteristics of the PDP perceptions. Chapter 7 analyzes the meaning making
of PDP experiences in general, whereas chapters 8 and 9 take the analysis a step further, and focus on
meaning making as connected to grief and worldview, respectively. Chapter 10 will relate grief,
worldview, and PDP to each other, and focus specifically on the dynamics of meaning making.
The chapters can be related to the research questions in the following way:
Chapter 6:
What characterizes the PDP experiences? (res. qu. 1)
Chapter 7:
How do people make sense of their PDP experiences? (res. qu. 2)
What is the significance of the PDP to those who experience them? (res. qu. 3)
Chapter 8:
How do PDP perceivers use the voices of grief in their sense making?
(secondary res. qu.)
What is the significance of PDP in the perceiver’s process of grief?
(secondary res. qu.)
Chapter 9:
How do PDP perceivers use the voices of a worldview in their sense making?
(secondary res. qu.)
What is the significance of PDP in the perceiver’s process of worldview?
(secondary res. qu.)
In chapter 6, I analyze the characteristics of the participants’ perceptions: their sensory perceptions,
quasi-sensory sense of presence and their signs of presence (see section 1.3.2.). Further, as reflected in
the introductory chapter, the perceptions include an interpretation so as to obtain an understanding of
what is perceived. Accordingly, in chapter 6, I also analyze how the participants are able to identify
whom they perceive to be present, where they are, and when it is happening, which reflect an
immediate interpretation when perceiving the phenomenon. Chapters 7, 8 and 9 connect the
perceptions more explicitly to the use of interpretive resources available in the different cultures that
the participants are situated.
As I have elaborated in sections 1.3.2 and 4.1, it is not possible to separate the perceptions, which also
are immediate experiences (chapter 6), from meaning making (chapters 7, 8, and 9). Further, the
meaning making process is not linear, where the perceptions come first and then the interpretation
131
follows. Yet it is useful to keep an analytic distinction between the immediate experiences or
perceptions and the meaning making that connects the immediate experiences to interpretive
resources. This makes it easier to discover if similar perceptions are accompanied by different
interpretations, and if the perception exceeds some of the available interpretive frameworks.
Moreover, the analytical distinction may help to identify perceptions that are not very significant or
meaningful to the perceiver. As previously mentioned, I use the concept of perceptions as “peculiar or
extraordinary perceptions”, where peculiar or extraordinary is understood to mean that “either its
genesis or physical nature is difficult to explain” (Kerns & Raghavan, 2000: 28).
As reflected in section 4.4.1., I have in the process of analysis used interpretive phenomenological
analysis (IPA), which is grounded in the text, and moves slowly to more interpretive levels. Formal
theoretical connections have been guided by the emerging analysis (Smith, 2004). The subsequent
composition of the analysis text tries to reflect this strategy by giving space to extracts from the
interviews and by moving from there to the more interpretive levels. Formal theories are used in three
different ways in the text: First, findings from relevant extant literature are used to compare and
contrast my findings. Second, theories are employed as conceptual frameworks (particularly in
chapters 7, 8, and 9), where I use the vocabulary of Dialogical Self Theory and Continuing Bonds
Theory to structure the material. Third, theories are introduced into a discussion of the material (see
section 4.4.4). This last use of theory is, however, only touched upon in the analysis chapters and will
be taken further in the discussion chapters in Part III.
132
Chapter 5: PERCEIVERS OF POST DEATH
PRESENCE
5.1.
Presentation of the Participants
I will now present the 16 participants in the study. The presentation includes some information about
their perceptions and experience of PDP, the death of their family member or friend, their relation to
the deceased and to other living persons, their worldview, place of living, and their profession.
Among all the experiences, each participant usually had a particular one that he or she emphasized
during the interview. In the following presentation, these experiences are reflected in the headings.
The participants appear in the same order as that in which they were interviewed. Ruth was the first
participant I met, followed by Siri, and so on. All names are, of course, fictitious.
Ruth:
Shadows by the door
Ruth (age 80 – 85) lost her husband 17 years before the interview in a sudden heart attack. She
describes the death as a shock, and the time right after it as very difficult, but she also characterizes
herself as strong and able to move forward. Ruth’s first PDP experience happened several years after
the death. Now she reports recurrent visions of shadows and silhouettes of people—particularly by the
doors in her apartment and at her cabin. She also describes a vivid vision of a luminous character
standing by her bed and asking her to come. Ruth calls herself religious, but not Christian, because
she has had negative experiences with church representatives and has difficulties with the dogma of
the atonement. She does have, however, some contact with the local church. Ruth believes the
characters she can see and hear are deceased people, and she particularly identifies her husband. She
feels her husband can see her and that they will meet when she dies.
Siri:
A telephone conversation
Siri (age 50 – 55) lost her only son in an accident 2 years before the interview. She tells that she is
still affected by the shock and grief, and has some difficulties with concentration, yet she is able to
continue with her work as an academic. Siri is divorced and lives alone in her apartment in the eastern
part of Norway. She has a large network of friends and colleagues and describes herself as sociable,
133
although with a need to have time alone. Siri reports several experiences of the presence of her son.
The most distinctive was in a telephone conversation where she could clearly hear her dead son’s
voice. Another experience involves the shivering of her coffee table after entering a specific web site.
Siri believes that the soul remains after death and moves into a new body when the time is due, and
that “everything is connected.” She further feels spiritual affinity with Buddhism, and is practicing
mindfulness and meditation. When she was younger, she was more politically active on the left wing,
not giving space to religious practices. Her belief in reincarnation started when her son was born and
was reinforced by her son’s psychic abilities. Siri has been in a couple of conversations with a
medium, although she has doubts about it.
Marianne: Smell of dogs and her brother “checking by”
Marianne (age 20 – 25) experienced her first contact with her deceased brother as a particularly vivid
dream. Some years later, she experienced her brother’s smell, which was a smell of dogs connected to
his interest in dogs. She also felt his presence. The sense of presence is still occurring 10 1/2 years
after his death, and she often feels that he is “checking by.” The death of her brother happened after
his suffering from cancer for several years. As a Christian, Marianne experienced a crisis of faith
when her brother died as a teenager. However, the PDP experiences gave meaning back to her and
helped her regain a belief in God. Marianne is a student and lives in the eastern part of Norway. At the
time of the interview, she had just broken up with her boyfriend, although she felt her dead brother
advised her to remain in the relationship. Marianne says she is influenced by her mother who holds a
Christian worldview that includes alternative spiritual beliefs and paranormal experiences.
Berit:
Sitting in his chair
Berit (age 70 – 75) is a retired schoolteacher living in the western part of Norway. Her partner died
suddenly and unexpectedly from a heart attack 2 years before the interview. Berit is suffering from
heart disease herself and has been through surgery. She describes the loss of her partner, whom she
was very close to, and from whom she received support when sick, as a traumatic experience. When
the ambulance reached their home after the death, they had to take Berit instead, and bring her to the
hospital due to the possibility that she was having a heart attack. In the hospital, Berit had a clear
vision of her dead partner telling her to get up. Berit now sees him sitting in his chair in front of the
television. She also sees him in other places in her house. At her birthplace, farther north, Berit’s
mother has been able to see him as well. Berit believes the spirits of the dead exist. She calls herself
134
an “impersonal Christian” (in Norwegian: “upersonlig kristen”). She says she has kept her faith from
childhood, but is open to belief in reincarnation.
Jeanette: Silhouette behind the curtain and rattling in the kitchen
Jeanette (age 55 – 60) is from the western part of Norway where she lives together with her daughter
and works as a salesperson. Her son committed suicide 7 years before the interview. Now she has
visual experiences of her son, and also of her mother, as shadows or silhouettes. She further perceives
that she gets signs from the deceased, for example, roses being thrown out of a vase without any
obvious reason, and pots and pans moving in the kitchen. She also tells of omens of death conveyed
through blackbirds tapping at the window, and messages telling her to avoid certain dangerous
situations. Jeanette claims to have warm hands and says she is able to heal. Besides taking part in
alternative practices and drawing on beliefs about reincarnation and helpers, she relates to the deacon
of the local church who tells her that her psychic abilities are from God and Jesus. Jeanette also
reports a vision of Jesus. However, she finds it hard to believe in God when so many unfair things
happen. For Jeanette, this refers not only to the suicide of her son, but also to earlier experiences of
death, divorce, and alcoholism in her close family. In her situation, her PDP experiences are important
in relation to the goodness of God.
Gunnar: Walking beside and teaching carpentry
Gunnar (age 60 – 65) lost his parents in a fire 25 years before the interview. He and his wife and
children lived close by, and Gunnar witnessed the fire without being able to save his parents. A
couple of weeks later, he had a vision of his mother telling him that she was all right. Later, he
visually perceived his father walking beside him. Now he often senses the presence of his father when
doing carpentry. He feels his father guides him while doing difficult construction work. Gunnar is
working in a church in the northern part of Norway. He calls himself a Christian, and the experience
of the presence of his parents plays a part in his history of faith. To be able to cope with the violent
death of his parents, Gunnar has received support from his family and friends.
Linda: Five helpers
Linda (age 50 – 55) works as a schoolteacher in the northern part of Norway. She tells that she can
see and hear several dead people—both close family and friends—and also more distant and unknown
135
people. Sometimes she experiences receiving messages from the dead, which she is asked to relate to
someone else. She also claims to receive omens of death and of birth. Her friend K, who died 2 years
ago, is quite often perceived as present. According to Linda, K appeared even during the interview.
In addition to K, Linda perceives her grandmother and some of her husband’s relatives whom she calls
her “helpers.” For Linda, the ability to experience the presence of dead people is natural, and has been
in the family for generations. This phenomenon is also common in the culture in which she lives.
Linda calls herself a Christian and is active in the local church. The local priest and deacon have
helped her to accept her psychic abilities.
Torill: Appearance of lost books
Torill (age 40 – 45) lost her daughter 7 years before the interview. Her daughter was severely disabled
and died at nine years old. Torill could feel the soul of her daughter before she was born, and she felt
a special contact—a contact which is still lasting. Now she can sense her daughter through visions,
signs, and other people who report her presence. The presence can be manifested, for instance, in lost
books that suddenly appear, and in ideas on how to make a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation. Torill
lives in the southern part of Norway. She works as a nurse and is also a student. Since the death of
her daughter, Torill has felt tired as the result of being responsible for the care of a disabled child for
many years. She also has a son to take care of. Torill has been interested in spiritual and religious
phenomena and experiences since childhood.
Elisabeth: Clock stopping and smell of honey
Elisabeth (age 40 – 45) works as a researcher and lives in the eastern part of Norway with her husband
and children. She describes herself as a happy person, but carrying a very large amount of grief.
Elisabeth lost her brother in an accident 2 years before the interview. She can now feel the presence
of her brother through signs such as butterflies, particular music, and a feeling of presence. She also
has an experience of a smell and a clock stopping that she connects with her brother. Elisabeth is open
to alternative spiritual ideas, but she has also drawn on her Christian beliefs since childhood. She has
been in contact with a medium who confirms that her brother is present.
Jorunn: Feeling dad’s hand
Jorunn (age 35 – 40) lost her father with whom she was very close 11 years before the interview. She
can still feel his presence around her and particularly around her son. She also feels the presence of
136
her grandfather. Not very long before the interview, Jorunn sensed her father’s hand on top of her
hand. She also feels unrest in some particular houses. Jorunn suffers from a physical disease that
makes her unable to work. She is, however, doing part-time studies. Her husband is very supportive,
and with his help she feels she is able to take care of her two children. Jorunn lives in the eastern part
of Norway. She is very fond of the folk church, and she speaks warmly about the church people and
about the hymns. The latter affinity she shared with her father before he died.
Eva: Voices of protection
Eva (age 35 – 40) is a friend of Jorunn’s, and she lives with her husband and two children in the
eastern part of Norway. Eva has had several experiences of dead people. Her first perception was of a
friend who died young, and she was able to see him standing beside the coffin at his funeral. Eva also
tells that she can feel the presence of her grandfather, grandmother, and great grandmother, and also
that she has perceived the presence of Torill’s father. Additionally, Eva can sense unknown people in
certain houses. The presence of her family is felt as a protective one. Eva grew up in a Christian
family and works in a church, but she says that it has been a journey for her to find a language that fits
her spiritual experiences. On that journey, it has been necessary to search outside the church and the
Christian milieu. Now Eva feels that she can find resonance in some of the Christian traditions and
feels more at home.
Thomas: A crazy atmosphere
Thomas (age 40 – 45) is the brother of Elisabeth. He lives in the eastern part of Norway with his
family and runs his own company. Tomas and Elisabeth’s brother died in an accident 2 years before
the interview. Thomas characterizes himself as strong and optimistic, so even though the grief is at
times very heavy, he manages to get on with life. Thomas can feel the presence of his brother quite
often. He also has experiences of signs of the deceased that have been accompanied with a “crazy
atmosphere” in the room. Further, Thomas feels he can receive thoughts from his brother, which are
in the form of advice. Thomas says that he has kept his Christian belief from childhood but hasn’t
paid much attention to religion in his grown-up life. The PDP experiences have made him more open
to alternative spiritual ideas, which were also presented to him by his mother.
137
Liv: The whole area blacked out
Liv (age 60 – 65) lost her son to suicide 6 years before the interview. After the death, Liv experienced
many strange episodes that she interpreted as signs from the deceased; for instance, the whole area
blacked out some days after his death without being registered at Hafslund, the electricity company.
Liv has also perceived visions and voices of her dead son, and of her mother. Significant in her story
is her regular meeting with a medium who conveys messages from her son and as such “validates”
Liv’s own perceptions. Some years before the death of her son, Liv became interested in spiritual
ideas and practices. She had a special relationship with her son because she perceived him to be a
very spiritual person with whom she could talk about the meaning of life. Liv lives together with her
husband in eastern Norway. Her living son has moved away from home. During recent years, Liv has
worked at the local school.
Vigdis: Walking across the room and giving a signature
Vigdis (age 75 – 80) is living in the eastern part of Norway where she is working with alternative
therapies. Vigdis perceives to see and hear several dead people, both relatives and friends, including
her mother and father. When Vigdis has a vision in which she is not sure about the identity of the
dead, she asks the dead to give a signature, that is, to show something specific to that particular
person. Vigdis has had psychic abilities since she was a small child, but it took some time before she
dared to share these with others, although her mother responded positively. Vigdis calls herself
spiritual but not religious. She believes in reincarnation and in different spiritual levels in another
dimension. She is educated in spiritual psychology.
Vidar: Change in weather and feeling of presence
Vidar (age 50 – 55) identifies himself as an atheist. He grew up in contact with a Christian milieu but
disapproved of the Christian belief and has withdrawn as a member of the Church of Norway. Vidar’s
PDP experience is a combination of a peculiar and sudden change in the weather and a feeling of his
deceased father’s presence. Vidar also describes a near-death experience and the ability to intuitively
know, across a long distance, how his parents were doing when they were alive and grew sick. The
relationship to his father is described as complicated. Vidar lives in eastern Norway where he works in
research.
138
Rune: A hand on the shoulder
Rune (age 40 – 45) lives in the eastern part of Norway together with his family. Rune works as an
engineer and describes himself as a “realist,” both in terms of his profession and his worldview. Rune
felt a hand on his shoulder, which he connects to his deceased father, 2 years before the interview. A
medium helped Rune with the interpretation of his perception. Because his father was sick for many
years, Rune does not report grieving after his father’s death as it was more of a relief when he died.
Moreover, Rune didn’t have a good relationship with his father. However, despite the bad
relationship, he feels it was OK to experience the presence of his father.
In table 5.2 below is an overview of the participants.
139
5.2. Overview of the participants
FICTITIOUS
NAME
GENDER
AGE
PLACE OF
LIVING
RELATIONSHIP
TO THE
DECEASED
Husband
TIME FROM
DEATH TO
INTERVIEW
17 years
Rut
Woman
80-85
Eastern
Norway
Siri
Woman
50-55
Marianne
Woman
Berit
PROFESSION
Eastern
Norway
Son
2 years
25-30
Eastern
Norway
Brother
10 years
Woman
70-75
Western
Norway
Partner
2 years
Pensioner,
former teacher
Jeanette
Woman
55-60
Western
Norway
Son, mother
7 years
Salesperson
Gunnar
Man
60-65
Northern
Norway
Mother, father
25 years
Working in a
church
Linda
Woman
50-55
Northern
Norway
2 years
(friend)
Others, earlier
Teacher
Torill
Woman
40-45
Southern
Norway
Grandmother,
husbands
grandparents,
friends, and more
Daughter
7 years
Nurse, student
Elisabeth
Woman
35-40
Eastern
Norway
Brother
2 years
Working in
research
Jorunn
Woman
35-40
Eastern
Norway
Father
11 years
Student
Eva
Woman
35-40
Eastern
Norway
Grandmother,
grandfather, friend
Varying
lengths of time
Working in a
church
Thomas
Man
40-45
Eastern
Norway
Brother
2 years
Managing
director
Liv
Woman
60-65
Eastern
Norway
Son
6 years
Working at a
local school
Vigdis
Woman
75-80
Eastern
Norway
Father, mother,
grandmother,
friend, and more
Therapist
Vidar
Man
50-55
Eastern
Norway
Father
25 years
(father), 29
years (mother)
Others,varying
lengths of time
17 years
Rune
Man
40-45
Southern
Norway
Father
2 years
Engineer
Pensioner,
former
secretary
Working in
academic
education and
research
Student
Working in
research
Table 5.2: Outline of the participants
Elisabeth and Thomas are siblings and Jorunn and Eva are friends
140
Chapter 6: PERCEPTIONS OF POST DEATH
PRESENCE
What characterizes PDP perceptions? When and where do they happen? How do the deceased appear
to the perceiver? In this chapter I will look at the perceptions of post death presence as described by
the 16 participants.
6.1. Perceptual quality and content of PDP
As discussed in the methods chapter (section 3.2), one of the inclusion-criteria was that all participants
should have experienced at least one sensory perception. The reason for this was not to narrow down
the scope in order to study only sensory PDP experiences. Rather, I was conscious of the need not to
place too narrow boundaries on the phenomenon to begin with, as I wanted to be able to look for
nuances between and beyond the categories. Although a sensory perception was specifically asked for
in the interviews, I was able to tap into the participants’ immediate experiences from a wider
perspective as well, as the interview-questions started very open ended.
I will first give an overview of the different modalities of the perceptions and relate them to other
research. I will then look at the quality and content of the perceptions in order to look for nuances,
similarities and differences. In the latter part I will ask how is PDP perceived, and what is perceived
during the PDP perceptions.
141
6.1.1. Overview of perceptual modalities
The perceptions spread out across different sensory modalities. Table 5.1 shows the range of
categories of PDP perceptions which I analyzed from the material.
Auditory
Ruth
Siri
Marianne
Berit
Jeanette
Gunnar
Linda
Torill
Elisabeth
Jorunn
Eva
Thomas
Liv
Vigdis
Vidar
Rune
Visual
Tactile
Olfactory
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Sense of
presence
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Signs of
presence
Other
DB vision118
X
X
X
X
X
X
Orbs119
Orbs
X
X
X
X
X
Table 5.1.: Perceptual characteristics of the PDC experiences
The sensory modalities to which the perceptions correspond are categorized as auditory, tactile,
olfactory and visual. In this group of participants, visual perceptions were the most common, closely
followed by auditory. Tactile perceptions were reported more rarely, and olfactory perceptions were
the least commonly reported mode of presence. The type of experience that all the participants
reported on when answering open questions was however, a sense of presence. Sense of presence
experiences were not specifically related to any of the senses, but were described as a feeling of the
dead being close by. It was also the most recurrent type of PDP experience among the participants.
Most of the participants experienced sense of presence quite often.
In addition to the sensory perceptions and the sense of presence, both of which are perceptual or quasiperceptual experiences of the deceased person in various forms, several of the participants told stories
about the movement of objects, interpreted as signs from the deceased. Some also reported special
dreams: Extra vivid dreams, where the deceased was perceived as present in a more “real” way than in
“normal” dreams, were experienced by four of the participants. However, as dreams were initially
118
DB vision = death bed vision, which means a vision of dead people calling on the experiencer. The visions are often
experienced by people who are themselves close to death.
119
Orbs are typically circular artifacts that occur in flash photography. Linda, however, could see orbs not only on
photographs but also in real life, as small transparent white circles around certain persons. The phenomenon is interpreted
as the presence of a dead spirit.
142
excluded from the PDP I wanted to study (see section 1.3), they are not included in the diagram 5.1.,
and will not be discussed in the following chapter. Similarly, contact through a medium, which I also
excluded from the focus, is not listed here. However, I will come back to that in chapter 7 because I
found that the medium visits and messages served a function in sense making of the PDP experiences
for many of the participants.
The aim of this small, qualitative sample is obviously not to count the prevalence of the different types
of perception. Still, I will mention that the high number of reported sense of presence experiences,
which were to a large extent reported without my asking specifically about them, is in line with larger
quantitative studies, as done for instance by Rees (1971) and Grimby (1998), where sense of presence
is the most common mode of PDP experience, followed by visions and voices. Tactile experiences are
rarely reported in those surveys, and olfactory perceptions are not studied.120 Olfactory experiences
are, however, found in other qualitative studies, as for instance those of Steffen and Coyle (2011),
Hayes (2011)121, and Haraldsson (1988).122 None of the participants suggested taste as a mode of
perception. This compares positively with the findings of other studies on PDP. Taste is very rarely
reported. The only study in which I have seen taste described as a PDP experience is Hayes (2011),
where one of the participants could taste the meatballs of his grandma. The taste was, however,
accompanied by the smell of the same meatballs.
There are of course other ways to categorize the perceptions. Signs of presence, which to a large
extent, have to do with perceived movement of objects, could for instance be included and merged into
the different categories of “sensory experiences” as the participants perceived seeing and hearing the
objects move or change place. However, as the object of perception in this case is not the deceased
herself, but objects linked with the deceased in different ways, I have put those experiences into a
separate category.123 The distinction is still not sharp.124 Auditions could, moreover, be distinguished
and separated into two parts: sounds and voices. This is, for instance, done by Hayes (2011), and is in
120
It is not relevant to compare the results in percentages of the population as Rees’ study was sampled randomly among
widows, and his results of 40 % sense of presence –experience is on the basis of the population of (N= 287).
121
Hayes’ (2011) study is the most similar when it comes to descriptions of the experience. Her results are not very
different in terms of modes of perception. However, her material has a higher occurrence of hearing voices. This is
probably due to her focus on voices through a pilot or “sister” study, which was linked to her doctoral project through
available data. Hayes also describes taste as a sensory modality experienced by one of her participants, whereas taste was
not mentioned by my participants.
122
Haraldsson (1988), in his study of claimed encounters with the dead found that 90% of the people in the survey reported
sensory experiences (apparitions) of a deceased person, of which 69% were visual, 28% auditory, 13% tactile, and 4%
olfactory.
123
The experience of “signs of presence” was however considered sufficient to be included in the sample because they
were reported as sensory perceptions, whether visual or auditory.
124
The objects were more or less connected to the deceased. When for instance sounds of pots and pans moving in the
kitchen were perceived as a mother tumbling around, the objects could be seen as an extension of her hands, and thus not
far from the sounds of a dead person walking across the floor, which is categorized as an auditory perception. However,
electricity that was switched on and off, tables that shook, flowers that fell out of a vase I perceive as less close to the
movement of the dead as being something he or she usually did when alive, and therefore the experience is placed in a
separate category.
143
line with her focus and theoretical position,125 whereas I keep them together, as I don’t intend to dig so
deeply into the linguistic ways of meaning making, but rather approach the phenomena at a more
thematic level.126 I will, however, come back to the differences of, for instance, sound and voice, clear
visions and vaguer resemblances, when analyzing the characteristics and immediate meaning making
of the different perceptions.
My categorization of perceptual modalities, which is based on the participants’ descriptions, and in
dialogue with relevant research literature, will provide the structure for the following section. The
categories will, however, be nuanced as the participants’ narrations of their experiences add further
color to the pure categories. I will try to answer the question: how is PDP perceived, and what is
perceived? I will do this by focusing on the quality and content of the different modes of perception.
I start with the auditory perceptions.
6.1.2. “It‘s not a thought which is coming, but a voice, his voice”
Auditory perceptions of PDP
Alone in her large house on a quiet evening, Liv perceived hearing footsteps. It sounded like slippers
crossing the floor, accompanied by the clicks of a stick.
Liv: I was home alone after she died, and then I turned off
the lights in the dining room that night, and then she came
walking through the room, because she walked with slippers
and a cane, and then: God!
A: Did you see anything?
Liv: No, I saw nothing, but I heard
A: Heard steps?
Liv: Yes, then she was walking.
Liv: Da var jeg alene hjemme etter at hun døde, og da
slukket jeg lyset i spisestuen på kvelden, og da kom hun
gående gjennom stuen, for hun gikk jo på tøfler med stokk,
og da: Guud!
A: Så du noe?
Liv: Nei, jeg så ikke, men jeg hørte
A: Hørte trinn?
Liv: Ja, da gikk hun.
Liv felt it was as though someone was walking through the room, and she connected the sound with
her deceased mother. Her mother was also, later, perceived visually, and her presence was also linked
to a sign when the smoke alarm turned on without there being any smoke in the room. In this
125
Hayes places her study in an ethnomethodological tradition, where indexicality is used as a guiding principle for the
analysis. She studies the voices in terms of their linguistic features, and makes a separation between linguistic experiences,
and non-linguistic experiences. She claims that the linguistic voices have an additional and complex source of meaning that
the other experiences of presence lack, and which she wants to study. Against this background, the separation between
voices and sounds is fruitful in her analysis (Hayes, 2011).
126
Hayes’ categorization also has overlapping fields, as for instance voice and vision are linked to the deceased in a more
iconic sense than are smells and taste (Hayes, 2011: 145).
144
particular story, however, the sound was the prominent feature. For Liv, the quality of the sound
pointed towards the presence of her mother. The clicks resembled the noise made by the stick that
Liv’s mother used when she was alive, and indicated to Liv that her deceased mother was in the living
room.
Similarly, Berit told how she could hear her deceased partner knock on his knee, a familiar movement
that he made when he was alive and sitting next to her in an armchair in the living room. She could
also hear his laughter.
Berit: I hear him laughing… in here (pointing at the back of
her head). I hear him laughing and I hear him do this (she
hits her knee), and then I see him sitting like this. If he was
very busy then he sat like this and then he laughed. He had a
warm laughter.
Berit: Jeg hører han ler… inni her (peker på bakhodet sitt) .
Jeg hører han ler og så hører jeg han gjør sånn (slår seg på
kneet), og så ser jeg han sitter sånn. Hvis han var veldig
opptatt så satt han sånn og så lo han. Han hadde en hjertelig
latter.
Sounds from the deceased, like the steps, knocking and laughter, were experienced by several of the
participants. The sounds were usually easily connected to the dead family member or friend, as the
character of the sound resembled the habits or characteristics of that particular person.
Most of the auditory perceptions in this material, however, came through hearing the voice of the
deceased, uttered through words. Gunnar, for instance, told about a voice-hearing experience with
words. It was some days after the fire in which his mother and father died that Gunnar heard his
mother speaking. “She talked to me as I can remember from when I was a little boy”, Gunnar
reflected in the interview. Although he could not recall any clear message, Gunnar remembered how
the tone of the voice and the words used were experienced as comforting, and how the warmth from
his mother was perceived as directed towards him. For Gunnar, the auditory perception was clearly
felt to be addressed to him. Despite the lack of sentences that he could remember, the voice conveyed
a message of comfort.
Auditory perceptions as voices were experienced by most of the participants as messages conveying to
them comfort, a challenge, or a prompting to motivate them to do something. This was the case with
Eva. At a difficult moment, Eva heard the voice of her grandmother speaking to her:
Eva: And then I can hear clearly in my head: “It is not you
who are going to learn from this, my girl.” It was her way of
speaking. I didn’t expect her to answer, but this is what she
said. And I knew it was grandma
Eva: Og så hører jeg tydelig inni hodet mitt: “Det er ikke du
som skal lære noe av det her, jenta mi”. Og det var hennes
måte å snakke til meg på. Og jeg forventet ikke svar, men
det var det hun sa. Og jeg visste at det var farmor.
145
Eva recognized the way of speaking as being that of her grandmother, and the message was important
for her in her situation.
Similarly, Siri told a story of her deceased son talking to her through the telephone: Shortly after the
accidental death of her son, Siri heard her mobile phone ringing. She noticed it, but didn’t answer the
phone as the friend who was with her, denied hearing the ringing sound. The sound went on and on
with Siri not answering. However, some days later, Siri went to a quiet place in the forest. Her
mobile phone rang again, and finally she was able to take the phone call as there was no one else
around. Through the phone, Siri perceived hearing her son’s voice. “I cannot retell the whole
conversation,” Siri said in the interview, “but it was a clear conversation with N.” For Siri, the voice
was perceived as part of a conversation where her dead son told her how it was for him to be on “the
other side”. Through the conversation, Siri became assured that her son was all right.
Also, Linda told about how she one night perceived hearing a clear voice giving her a message.
However, in this case the message was not addressed to her, but was supposed to be communicated to
someone else. Through his appearance the deceased was recognized as a close neighbor and friend.
The message was to his living son.
Linda: But in any case: So I turn towards the bedroom door
– the bedroom was there, before we expanded. And so he
asks if I can give HI a message from him. And I can
describe H. And it was so weird, because it wasn't an H with
gray hair. He was so much younger. But anyway, I still saw
it was H, because I remembered him from when I was
younger. He could have been between 35 and 40 if I should
guess. And he was wearing the suit I remember from my
childhood.
Can you give HI a message from me? And it was rather
cryptic this message, so I thought; now I’m turning crazy!
So I bent down on the floor and then I pick up “Hjemmet”
and flip to a page and sit like this (she shows herself
holding the magazine in front of her face as if she is reading)
while I speak with H who's standing in the doorway. Then
he says: When HI crosses the border by the steep hill, then
he must be careful or something will go wrong. And it was
during winter or spring, as there was still snow on the
ground. Yes, I said, that I can do. But what should I do if he
doesn’t believe me? Yes, he’ll eventually understand. Yes,
well.
Linda: Men i alle fall: Så snur jeg meg mot soveroms-døren
– soverommet var der da, før vi bygde ut. Og så spør han om
jeg kan gi HI en beskjed fra ham. Og jeg kan beskrive H. Og
det var så rart, for det var ikke en H med grått hår. Han var
så mye yngre. Men allikevel så jeg at det var H, for jeg
husket ham fra jeg var unge. Han kan ha vært mellom 35 og
40 hvis jeg skal anslå, og han hadde den dressen jeg husket
fra barndommen på seg.
Kan du gi HI en beskjed fra meg? Og det var rimelig
kryptisk den beskjeden, så jeg tenkte; nå tuller det for deg!
Så jeg bøyde meg på gulvet, og så tar jeg “Hjemmet” og blar
opp på rett side og så setter jeg meg sånn (viser at hun har
bladet foran ansiktet som om hun leser) mens jeg snakker
med H som står i døra. Så sier han: Når HI skal over grensen
i den bratte bakken, så må han være forsiktig eller så går det
galt. Og det var jo på vinteren eller våren, det var ennå snø
liggende på innersida. Ja, sier jeg, det skal jeg gjøre. Men
hva skal jeg gjøre hvis han ikke vil tro meg? Jo, han vil etter
hvert skjønne. Ja, vel
Linda passed on the message, and although the receiver (the deceased’s son) said that he didn’t
understand what she meant, and claimed she was crazy, Linda, however, felt peace for having
completed the task. Later the recipient came to her and admitted that the advice to slow down the car
on a particular slope probably helped him to avoid a dangerous situation, which most likely would
have caused his death.
146
I will come back to the significance of the PDP experiences in section 7.2, that is, how the participants
experienced help or guidance, or other benefits from the experience. However, what is relevant in the
story of Linda, when analyzing auditory perceptions, is that the words were perceived as clear, and
had a message. However, it was the visual appearance of the dead person that helped Linda to
recognize who was speaking. This perception was thus experienced through two sensory modalities,
and Linda never questioned the identity of the deceased person in either the auditory or visual
perceptions.
What was salient in the participants’ stories is that the voices were identified as belonging to and
coming from the deceased. Some of the participants also explicitly distinguished the voice from a
thought, or from their own internal voice, as when speaking to oneself. Siri expressed the distinction:
“It is not my thoughts speaking to my thoughts, it is his voice.” Similarly, Berit exclaimed, “It‘s not a
thought which is coming, but a voice, his voice.” That the voices and sounds were perceived as
belonging to the deceased, and not to the experiencer herself, was common with the auditory
perceptions. None of the participants doubted the identity of the source of the auditory perceptions; in
their view it was the dead who were making the noise, the sounds, or who were speaking.
Nevertheless, the sound and the voices were perceived differently from the sounds and voices of living
people. It was not the same as when having a conversation with a living person. The auditory PDP
experiences were perceived more on the “inside” than conversations with a living person sitting next
to you, as Eva for instance described, when she told about her grandmother speaking to her. I will
come back to the spatial perceptions in section 6.3, but for now I can stipulate that, the auditory
perceptions were neither perceived like a thought, nor like talking to oneself, and nor were they like
hearing the voice of a living person. It was qualitatively different. Overall, they were perceived as
belonging to a particular dead person, whether vague or clear.
To sum up, auditory perceptions can be heard as being the dead person’s voice talking and conveying
messages, but also as sounds believed to come from the deceased moving around. The sounds are
connected to the dead person’s moving his or her body. The voices are connected to the dead’s
utterances, mostly through words and sentences, but also as laughter. Taking these findings further,
the clarity of the auditory perception can be visualized on a line from the vaguer sounds to the clearer
messages, uttered through words, especially addressed to the bereaved. The immediate recognition of
a particular dead person is obtained through the quality of the perception, whether sounds or voices,
such as when Eva stated that it was her grandmother’s way of talking, but also as a contextualization,
for instance by knowing that the dead used a stick for walking. Further, when other senses are
involved, it may be the vision rather than the auditory perception that is the decisive modality that
147
connects the perception to the particular dead person. The voices are experienced as something which
is neither the voice of a living person, nor one’s own inner voice.
6.1.3. “I see something physical, but it is not exactly the same as when they were alive”
Visual perceptions of PDP
As indicated, ten of the sixteen participants reported visual perceptions. Sometimes the dead were
seen as a shadow or silhouette. “It is a shadow, yes, a silhouette, you can say”, as Jeanette described
her experience. The shadows revealed the contours of a human being, but they did not show the face.
Ruth narrated as follows:
Ruth: I’m sitting here alone at night and then a shadow
comes. It's not any person, but it's also no... it's after all a
shadow of a person. But I see no face, and it's very strange,
and it has come these later years, for many years.
Ruth: Jeg sitter her alene om kvelden og så kommer det en
skygge. Det er jo ikke noe menneske, men det er jo heller
ikke no… det er jo en skygge av et menneske. Men jeg ser
jo ikke ansikt, og det er veldig merkelig, og det har kommet
i de senere år, i flere år.
Ruth was not absolutely sure about the identity of the shadows, but she assumed they were of her dead
husband. She did not reflect on how she came to connect the shadows with her husband, as some of
the other participants did. In order to recognize the shadow as a particular dead person, those
participants used other senses, or a feeling of presence. Jeanette, for instance, said she could feel the
identity through the feeling of a particular energy or chemistry: “You don’t see them; but I know it is
him because you feel the chemistry is right”, Jeanette claimed.
Other times the perception was of a real person, although not totally similar to when the dead person
was alive. Eva told, for instance, that she could see the dead as a character, including the face, but not
with clear features. She recognized the vision as being her great grandmother, although her great
grandmother in the vision did not look exactly like she did in the picture taken when she was alive.
Eva: My great-grandmother died on the day one year before
I was born and she is very much with me, and I have
experienced her sitting at my bedside. Really, this is a
person I have never known. I have for that matter seen
pictures of her, but her picture has not really matched up
with my impressions, but I just know it's her.
Eva: Min oldemor døde på dagen ett år før jeg ble født og
hun er veldig mye med meg, og jeg har opplevd henne sitte
på sengekanten. Altså, dette er et menneske jeg aldri har
kjent. Jeg har for så vidt sett bilder av henne, men bildet har
ikke helt stemt med mine fornemmelser, men jeg bare vet at
det er henne.
It was thus a feeling, a kind of bodily sensation that made Eva believe that it was her great
grandmother, although she could not contextualize her vision with a picture, or from memory. Other
participants could recognize the deceased in their visual perception from their appearance. They told
148
that they could see the dead wearing the same clothes they used to wear, and looking almost like they
did when they were alive—although they were physically different because they were able to “show
up from nowhere” and “walk through walls.”
Vigdis: Yes, I saw my mother after she was dead. It was a
week after she was dead, then she walked straight across the
room here. And then I had the sofa there, so I sat there and
had a bookcase there, and then she came walking through
the wall. And she was like you can see on TV. And I was
wide awake. She was wearing a dress which she used to
wear when she was alive. And the bookcase stood there, and
there I had clipped out her obituary and put it on a shelf. So
she was just going to look at it.
A: Precisely. How did she look?
Vigdis: Exactly as she was
A: Young, old?
Vigdis: As she was in her older years right before she died,
actually.
Vigdis: Ja, jeg så min mor etter at hun var død. Det var en
uke etter at hun var død, så gikk hun tvers gjennom rommet
her. Og da hadde jeg sofaen der, så jeg satt der og hadde en
bokreol her, og så kom hun gående gjennom veggen. Og hun
var sånn du ser det på tv. Og jeg var lys våken. Hun hadde
på seg en drakt som hun pleide å bruke mye mens hun levde.
Og bokreolen stod der, og der hadde jeg klippet ut
dødsannonsen hennes og lagt inn i en hylle. Så hun skulle
bare bort å se på den.
A: Nettopp. Hvordan så hun ut?
Vigdis: Akkurat sånn som hun var
A: Ung, gammel?
Vigdis: Som hun var på sine gamle dager like før hun døde,
faktisk.
Similarly, Berit and Torill told that they could see the “dead as they were”: Their deceased partner and
daughter, respectively, were sitting in the same chair where they used to sit when alive, and looking
like they did when alive. In these cases, the dead looked as they did not long before they died. Other
participants perceived the dead as a younger version, as did Linda, who had a vision of her dead
neighbor who appeared younger, without his grey hair.
In relation to age, Eva introduced the difference between visions of the dead and memories of a living
person, by saying that the deceased was “a little bit younger, but was not related to age.” Linda
described the difference by saying that her dead friend was more “glassy” (in Norwegian: glassaktig)
than a living human being. The appearance and radiance of her dead grandmother was like “the white
shining of a candle”, and the color was not only seen, but also felt as “warm velvet”. Eva used images
to describe the content of her visual experiences: both the similarities and differences in seeing her
grandmother and friend now, in comparison to when they were living:
149
Linda: There was no doubt that this was grandma, really. It
was her dark curly hair and it was.. she always wore a
cardigan , with an apron underneath. So she was wearing
that light blue cardigan jacket, but not the apron.
A: Did you see her face?
D7: Yes. It was very smooth, and she smiled. She had after
all gray hair. But she didn't have gray hair then. She had just
as dark hair as you. It was at an earlier stage. She was light.
When I say light then I don't mean that kind of light, blonde,
but this (points at a candle on the table). It shone from her. I
have a picture, or my sister has a picture of an angel hanging
over a bed, or over a child who is sleeping, and then there is
a shining from that angel which is reminiscent of the shining
of my grandma. You can say that the colors are like that, but
it’s not experienced like that. It feels like warm velvet. I
can't explain the feeling, but I experience the feeling again
when I speak of it.
Linda: Det var ikke tvil om at det var mormor, altså. Det var
hennes mørke krølla hår og det var.. hun gikk alltid i en sånn
cardigan jakke, og så hadde hun forkle under der igjen. Så
hun hadde den der lyse blå cardiganjakka på seg, men ikke
forkle da.
A: Så du ansiktet?
D7: Ja. Det var veldig slett, og hun smilte. Hun hadde jo
grått hår. Men hun hadde ikke grått hår da. Hun hadde like
mørkt hår som du. Det var et tidligere stadium. Hun var lys.
Når jeg sier lys så mener jeg ikke sånn lys, blond, men sånn
(peker på stearinlyset på bordet) Det lyste av henne. Jeg har
et bilde, eller søstera mi har et bilde av en engel som henger
over en seng, eller en unge som ligger og sover, og da er det
et skinn over den engelen det minner om skinnet av mormor.
Du kan si at fargen er sånn, men den oppleves ikke sånn.
Den oppleves som varm fløyel. Jeg kan ikke forklare
følelsen, men jeg kjenner den igjen når jeg snakker om den.
---
---
Linda: How shall I explain it that I see her? She is more
glassy than you are, and she sits like she used to sit, like this
and with her arms like this over the armrest. And she smiles
the entire time.
Linda: Hvordan skal jeg forklare det at jeg ser henne? Hun
er mer glassaktig enn du er da. Og så sitter hun som hun
pleier å sitte, sånn og med armene sånn over armlenet. Og så
smiler hun hele tiden.
In this last passage, the deceased friend had, according to Linda, appeared in the sofa between her and
me. Thus, when describing the outfit her friend was wearing Linda was looking at her, and said that
she was wearing a white skirt with flowers on it. Linda also communicated with her friend in the
course of this time, and told me that her friend was smiling.
The visual perceptions were, in some cases, perceived as clearly intended for the living. In other cases
the address was less clear. A mother passing by in the living room, some shadows by the door, a
friend beside his coffin in the church, those experiences were perceived as less intentional than in the
case of Eva’s visual perception of her great grandmother sitting at her bedside, or of Linda’s friend
appearing on the sofa.
As with the auditory perceptions, there were, in the stories of the visual perceptions, different degrees
of clarity. The deceased were, however, in all the different variations, seen as “physical” in that the
perceiver could make out the contour of a human being. There were greater or lesser resemblances to
what the dead looked like when alive, with familiar clothes, smiles and gestures. But even the clearest
visual perception did contain some differences from a living person: the dead were seen walking
through walls (Vigdis), appeared more “glassy” (Linda) and did not look the same as a picture of the
dead person (Eva). Likewise, the perceptual quality was different from that when seeing a living
person. Some of the participants claimed that they saw the dead “inside their head”—in a similar way
to the auditory perceptions where they heard the dead “inside their head.”
150
Eva: So, my first experience was actually at the burial of a
former swimming buddy, in that he stood beside the coffin,
so on the left side of the coffin up in the choir.
A: You saw him?
Eva: Yes, in my head. Not like I see you, but I saw him in
my head and he was very distinct.
Eva: Altså, den første opplevelsen min var faktisk i
begravelsen til en tidligere svømmekompis, ved at han stod
ved siden av kisten, altså på venstre side av kisten oppe i
koret.
A: Du så ham?
Eva: Ja, inni hodet. Ikke sånn som jeg ser deg, men jeg så
ham inni hodet og han var veldig tydelig.
On the other hand, the perceptions of “inside the head” were distinguished from an inner memory of
the dead. When asked about the differences, Eva explained that the differences lay in the place where
the deceased was perceived, and in the possibility of controlling the placement. In PDP perceptions
the dead do not necessarily appear in the places where they used to be when they were alive, which is
often where they are placed in memories. Eva reasoned that when you memorize the dead you see
them where you remember them, whereas in the PDP perceptions you cannot determine where the
dead will show up. It can be in familiar places, but it does not necessarily have to be there. The PDP
experiences are spontaneous, and not possible to control. Thus deciding on the place where they will
show up is impossible, according to Eva. I will come back to the spontaneity of the experience in
section 6.2.2, and to the perceptual space in section 6.3.2,
In summing up, like the auditory perceptions, the visual perceptions are perceived with varying
degrees of clarity, from shadows, through more vague resemblances to a particular deceased person, to
visions of the dead, in his or her own clothes, looking like he or she did when alive. Their appearance
is perceived as more or less directed towards the living. Unlike the auditory perceptions, the visual
perceptions do not, in themselves, contain a message, but the context of the appearance can still make
the participants feel that the vision is for them, like a grandmother who appears at the bedside, or when
the dead is perceived as smiling at the living.
6.1.4.
“Suddenly I felt a warm hand around my hand”
Tactile perceptions of PDP
Some of the participants reported that they could feel a touch, such as a pressure felt against their
shoulder, a hand over their hand, a stroke on their cheek—or a handshake, such as Rune experienced a
couple of weeks after the death of his father:
151
Rune: I think it was maybe one or two weeks after he died,
after the burial. He lived in A and we got him up to A. He
had many strokes and heart attacks and such, so I stood in
the living room completely alone, my wife was at work, the
kids were at school. I put together a load of clothes and there
I felt someone place a hand on my right shoulder. It was a…
what shall I say… a clear, steady touch, exactly like
someone was going to give you a hug or… but it was… I
felt it very well. I knew I was alone. I turned around, it was
nobody there.
Rune: Jeg tror kanskje det var en eller to uker ette at han
døde, etter begravelsen. Han bodde i A og vi fikk ham opp
til A. Han hadde masse hjerneslag og hjerteinfarkt og sånn,
så jeg stod hjemme i stua helt alene, fruen var på jobb,
ungene var på skolen. Jeg la sammen en masse klær og der
kjente jeg at det var noen som la en hånd på høyre skulderen
min. Det var et.. hva skal jeg si… et kontant håndtrykk,
akkurat som noen skal gi deg en klem eller.. men det var..
jeg kjente det veldig godt. Jeg visste jeg var alene. Jeg
snudde meg rundt, det var jo ingen der
Rune could not recognize the handshake as belonging to his father on the basis of its sensational
quality. However, that was the case for Jorunn, as told in her narration of feeling a touch. Sitting at
the bedside of her dying mother and holding her hand, Jorunn felt her deceased father lay his hand
over their hands. The special tactile feeling resembled exactly the hands of her father. Jorunn could
recognize it “because my dad had cut off two of his fingers, and I felt it was that hand.” The shape of
the hand, and also the rough, yet smooth, texture that she could sense, was like that of her father’s hard
working hands. Similarly, Siri linked the quality of a tactile experience with her son: “N had very
warm hands. Suddenly I felt a warm hand around my hand”, Siri told. In her story about this
experience, Siri also told that she went out in the forest on a cold winter’s day and for some reason she
only wore a glove on one of her hands. When she stopped to hold around a tree—a meditative
practice she did now and then—she felt a warm hand around her cold gloveless hand, and immediately
felt it was her dead son reaching out to her.
Tactile experiences were further described as a feeling that someone was stroking one’s hair, or
stroking one’s cheek. When describing the experience of being stroked, Linda elaborated as follows:
A: You said she stroked your cheek and…
Linda: Yes she stroked me (motions with her hands) and I
felt… Shall we say, so you don't feel this here (patting
herself on the cheek) You feel just a... Have you been
pregnant?
A: Yes
Linda: Yes, I know that incidentally. It’s like the butterfly
wing-beats exactly when you notice that there is life. It feels
exactly like that. But it is also soft. It is the softest velvet
which strokes across my cheek. Not like this, but this. If I
only just touch myself then I recognize the feeling. Because
it was so darn good. It was so comforting. I’m certain that it
has the same function for me as ten valiums for a person
addicted to drugs. It was just delightful.
A: Du sa at hun strøk deg på kinnet og..
Linda: Jo hun strøk meg (viser med hendene) og jeg kjente...
Skal vi si, altså du kjenner ikke den der (klapper seg på
kinnet) Du kjenner bare en... Har du vært gravid?
A: Ja
Linda: Ja, det vet jeg forresten. Det er som
sommerfuglslagene akkurat når du merker at det er liv.
Akkurats sånn føltes det. Men det er også mykt. Det er det
mykeste fløyel som stryker over kinnet mitt. Ikke sånn, men
sånn. Bare jeg tar på meg selv så kjenner jeg følelsen. For
den var så himla god. Det var så betryggende. Jeg er sikker
på at det har samme funksjon på meg som ti valium på en
som er avhengig av rustabletter. Det var helt deilig.
The stroke on her cheek was accompanied by a special feeling, which Linda described through the use
of images: butterfly-wings and soft velvet. It was like the butterfly-wings one can feel when pregnant
and the baby moves for the first time, and the soft velvet against the cheek was a pleasant sensation,
accompanied by a feeling of movement, Linda elaborated. In this narrative Linda also attempted to
152
distinguish between the feelings of a touch received from a living person, and that from a dead person.
Linda demonstrated with her hands that the tactile sensation of the deceased is not the same as when a
living person is stroking your cheek, but softer. When describing the tactile perceptions, Linda used
her hands, and she used images pointing to bodily sensations that were soft and had a calming effect.
The link between the bodily perception and the interpretation which links the touch to a particular
deceased was based on the felt characteristics of the deceased’s hands as having a special shape or
being warm. In Rune’s case, however, it was a later visit to a medium that interpreted who was the
actor of the handshake. I will come back to mediums as interpretive sources in section 6.1.6.
Thus, in summing up, tactile perceptions can also, corresponding to visual and auditory perceptions,
be seen as more or less resembling those of the particular dead person. Rune’s perception of a
handshake was more unspecified than Jorunn’s and Siri’s perceptions were of the particular hand of
their father and son, respectively. In the latter cases, the dead were identified by the quality of the
tactile perceptions. When perceiving less specified tactile perceptions, the participant interpreted
through the context, or in Rune’s case, through a medium. Parallel to visual and auditory perceptions,
the tactile perceptions can be differentiated from the touch of a living person.
6.1.5.
“It was just like honey in the entire room”
Olfactory perceptions of PDP
The smell of honey and the smell of dogs featured in the stories of two of the participants, namely
Marianne and Elisabeth. Marianne experienced the smell of dogs, which was a smell she associated
with her dead brother who used to spend much time with his dogs and hence often smelled that way.
Elisabeth narrated an olfactory experience of honey:
Elisabeth: But so, the next morning, I was going to take care
of my one year old, after a night with a dirty diaper, right.
And so then he didn't really smell like pee or a little baby,
but just extremely like honey. It was just like honey in the
entire room. And the only thing which H ate when he was
little, from when he was one to when he was six years old,
was toasted bread with honey. It was the only thing that he
wanted to eat, so I spoke with my child: what is happening
here? It smells so much like honey here. This should really
H have known. And then came very strong feelings and I
just begin to cry and my one year old just hugs me and hugs
me and laughs loudly and hugs me and hugs me. It was very
strong and very emotional.
Elisabeth: Men så neste morgen, skulle jeg stelle ettåringen
min, etter en natt med tung bleie, ikke sant. Og så bare luktet
han ikke så veldig tiss eller liten baby, men bare ekstremt
honning. Det var bare sånn der honning i hele rommet. Og
det som H bare spiste når han var liten, fra han var ett til han
var seks år, var ristet brød med honning. Det var bare det
han ville spise, så jeg snakket med barnet mitt: hva er det
som skjer her? Det lukter så honning her. Det skulle liksom
H ha visst. Og så kom veldig sterke følelser og jeg begynner
å gråte og han ettåringen min klemmer meg og klemmer
meg og ler høyt og klemmer meg og klemmer meg. Det er
veldig sterkt og veldig emosjonelt.
153
For Elisabeth, the smell of honey was related to her dead brother’s eating honey, and probably
smelling of honey when he was a little boy. Similarly, the smell of dogs was related to the way
Marianne’s brother used to smell because he was close to his dogs. The smells in both cases were
connected to the deceased by their quality. The type of smell had something to do with the deceased’s
history. There were no attempts in the narrations to make distinctions between smells associated with
living person and smells associated with the dead, but the misfit between the situation (the smell of a
baby would probably be pee) and the perception (the smell of honey) made the olfactory perception
stand out as odd under the circumstances, and hence point towards a more extraordinary experience,
namely the presence of the dead person. The honey smell was meaningful in the here and now in
relation to the situation where Elisabeth needed to connect with her brother. Hence, Elisabeth
considered the smell as intentional in this context, and as a sign to her from her brother.
These experiencers indicated that olfactory experiences can be strong indicators of the presence of the
deceased. Although the intentionality is not as in voices and visions, where the dead can be perceived
to say something to the living, or are seen smiling at the living, a smell associated with the dead can be
interpreted as an intentional presence, the dead showing that he or she is “there.”
6.1.6.
“I saw him clearly and he said..”
Combination of modes of sensory PDP perceptions
As I have touched upon, several of the participants experienced the dead through different modes of
perception. For instance, they both saw and heard the dead in the same experience, as Berit described
here:
Berit: Then I woke up like five fifty-five, and then I saw,
then I saw him. There was like a window in-between the
rooms with blinds in front, and in this frame I saw him
really clearly, then said … “ Pull yourself together and get
up”
A: He said?
Berit: Yes. Or he said: “Aren't you going to getting yourself
up now?”
Berit: Da var det første, da våkna jeg sånn fem på seks, og
da så jeg, da så jeg ham. Det var sånn vindu i mellom
rommene med persienner foran, og inni i den rammen så jeg
ham helt tydelig, så sa … “Nå må du se til å komme deg
opp”
A: Sa han?
Berit: Ja. Eller han sa: “Skal du ikke se til å komme deg opp
nå?”
Some also saw and felt the dead in the same experience. When Linda described how her grandmother
stroked her cheek (a tactile experience) I asked: “How did you know that it was your grandmother?” to
which Linda answered, “Because I saw her”.
154
The presence of the dead was also experienced through different perceptual modalities at different
times, but all connected to the same dead person. I have already mentioned Liv, who heard her mother
walking across the room, with the steps and the stick making sounds. Some days later Liv perceived
her mother visually, as a shadow or a silhouette. This was also the case with some of the other
participants.
Moreover, for those who had PDP perceptions of different dead people, the sensory modality could
vary between the different relations. Some dead people were heard, others were seen, and some were
heard, seen and felt. Eva, for instance, who heard her grandmother’s voice at a difficult time in her
life, also had a visual experience of a dead friend standing beside his coffin at the funeral.
The most common combination was, however, to experience a sense of presence in addition to the
different sensory perceptions. I will now move to the sense of presence, which is a mode of
experience reported by all the participants.
6.1.7.
“I feel the presence in my body, but not the way like he touches me”
Sense of presence
Even though I was particularly asking for sensory experiences, the participants introduced the
experience of sense of presence, or feeling of presence, as the opening line in the first interview
shows:
Ruth: Now however, I feel that I have a connection with
him, even if he is dead. I feel a relationship, feel also that he
is with me, very, and it is very weird. Yes.
A: Do you experience him saying anything to you?
Ruth: No. Nothing. He says nothing. Only his presence
Ruth: Nå altså, jeg føler at jeg har en kontakt med ham, enda
han er jo død. Jeg føler et forhold, føler også at han er med
meg, veldig, og det er veldig rart. Ja.(trykk på ordene i
denne setningen)
A: Opplever du at han sier noe til deg?
Ruth: Nei. Ingen ting. Sier ikke noe. Bare nærvær
In this section of the interview, Ruth stated that she often feels a presence, or feels a contact, without
perceiving any words. When I asked the participants to describe this feeling or sense (in Norwegian:
“fornemmelse”) of presence, which was not specifically related to any of the senses, Marianne tried to
explain:
155
Marianne: So, I have thought a little about how I should
explain this to you. It's like, for example if one stands in the
kitchen and makes food, with one's back to the door for
example, then one notices that something enters through the
door without you necessarily hearing a lot of noise around it.
So you just know that there is someone in the room. It‘s a bit
like that. Suddenly I feel that there is someone in the room,
or that he is there.
A: The sensation that he is in the room
Marianne: Yes, without being able to explain it. I don't
necessarily receive any signs when he is in the room.
A: Because it's not as if you see, or hear, or smell or feel
something?
Marianne: No, not like that. So, I feel it in my body, but not
like as if he's touching me.
Marianne: Altså, jeg har tenkt litt på hvordan jeg skal
forsøke å forklare dette for deg. Det er litt sånn, for
eksempel hvis man står og lager mat på kjøkkenet, med
ryggen mot døra for eksempel, så merker man at det er noe
som kommer inn døra uten at du nødvendigvis hører veldig
mye bråk rundt det. Så du bare veit at det er noen i rommet.
Litt sånn er det det egentlig er. Plutselig så føler jeg at det er
noen i rommet, eller at han er der da.
A: Fornemmelse av at han er i rommet
Marianne: Ja, uten at jeg kan forklare det. Jeg får ikke noe
tegn nødvendigvis på at nå er han i rommet.
A: For det er ikke slik at du ser, eller hører, eller lukter eller
kjenner noe?
Marianne: Nei, ikke sånn. Altså, jeg kjenner det på kroppen,
men ikke sånn type at han tar på meg.
Marianne compared the feeling of presence to the feeling when a living person enters a room behind
your back. She also distinguished the sense of presence from tactile perceptions. The difference,
according to Marianne, is that although the sense of presence is felt bodily (in Norwegian: “kjenne det
på kroppen”), it is not the same as when someone is touching you. It is not a sensation of touch, but
rather a bodily feeling.
Some of the participants made a point of drawing a distinction between the sense of presence and the
more sensory perceptions, as for instance Siri did in the opening line of her interview:
Siri: The reason that I said yes to this interview is that I once
experienced that I spoke with him, outright spoke with him,
and what I like in the leaflet I just signed (information sheet
and consent form), is a formulation that you have, and it
deals with what is experienced. And this is very different
than being able to have some small contact, you know what
I mean? So, in other words, it’s a little more unclear than the
one time that I really experienced that I spoke with him.
Siri: Grunnen til at jeg sa ja til dette intervjuet er at jeg en
gang opplever at jeg har snakket med ham, regelrett snakket
med ham, og det jeg liker i det skrivet jeg akkurat
undertegnet på (informasjonsskriv og samtykkeerklæring),
er en formulering som du har, og det handler om hva som er
erfart. Og det er veldig annerledes enn å kunne ha litt sånn
kontakt, hvis du skjønner? Altså, noe litt mer diffust enn den
ene gangen at jeg virkelig opplevde at jeg snakket med ham.
Siri identified a difference between what she called “a little bit of contact” and the more sensory
perception of hearing the voice of the dead. The latter gave a stronger impression, according to Siri,
and she called it an experience. The “little bit of contact”, which she later described as “a sense of
presence”, is more blurred, and can easily be blended with a wish to feel the presence of the dead.
Hence, Siri considered the perception of a sense of presence as less reliable. Further in the interview
she elaborated on this:
156
Siri: “I feel so much that H was here.” These experiences I
don't have so often. But sometimes I can have them, but it’s
after all very unclear. So like for example that I have a
summerhouse which N loved above everything else on this
planet, and there both my daughter in law and myself can
experience that N is here.
Siri: “Jeg opplever så veldig at H var her.” Sånne erfaringer
har ikke jeg så mye. Men noen ganger kan jeg ha det, men
det er jo veldig diffust. Altså... sånn som for eksempel at jeg
har et sommerhus som N elsket over alt på jord, og der kan
både min svigerdatter og jeg oppleve at her er N.
Similarly, Gunnar distinguished the experience of a vision or of a voice from the more general feeling
that the dead is “there”.
A: If you can describe the difference between this and the
first time you described, when you saw him walk along.
Gunnar: The first time was more physical. Then I felt that he
was beside me. I could have touched him, but I didn't try to.
But so, I felt then that he walked beside me, and spoke with
me, but...
A: Then you saw him?
Gunnar: Yes, I did. I saw what he was wearing and… But
neither with him nor mom can I later say if I could see their
facial features and stuff, it was more unclear, but the body
was there and they walked in clothes which they used to
own. So then, in this way they were physically present. But
he isn’t anymore. Now he is just barely… not a voice either,
but suddenly I feel that he is there and in a way he guides
me.
A: Hvis du skal beskrive forskjellen på dette og det første du
beskrev, da du så han gå bortover.
Gunnar: Den første var mer fysisk. Da følte jeg at han var
ved siden av meg. Jeg kunne ha tatt på han, men jeg prøvde
ikke på det. Men altså, da følte jeg at han gikk ved siden av
meg, og prata med meg, men..
A: Da så du han?
Gunnar: Ja, det gjorde jeg. Jeg så hva han hadde på seg og..
Men verken med han eller mor klarer jeg å i ettertid å si om
jeg kunne se ansiktstrekk og sånn, det var mer diffust, men
kroppen var der og de gikk i klærne som de hadde hatt
tidligere. Så sånn var de fysisk til stede, da. Men det er han
ikke nå. Nå er han bare nærmest som en.. ikke stemme
heller, men plutselig så føler jeg at han er der og på en måte
rettleder meg.
For Gunnar, feeling the presence of his father was not perceived through his senses, as was the case
with the more “physical” experience soon after his parents died in the fire.
Summing up, there are distinctions in the material between a sense of presence, which is a more vague
feeling, and which cannot be pinned down to any of the senses, but is nevertheless a bodily feeling of
someone being present, and the sensory perceptions, which are perceived through one or more sensory
modalities.
6.1.8.
“For there are degrees as well”
A continuum of vividness of PDP experiences
Several of the participants in this study described the sense of presence as something which can be
distinguished from the more sensory experiences. However, not all the participants found the
distinction between sense of presence and sensory perceptions as a clear line that was easy to draw.
Eva brought up this topic towards the end of her interview. She knew that I made a distinction
between the two as, in order to assess whether she could be included in the sample, I had asked her
157
before the interview if she had had any experiences where she could see, hear, smell, or feel a touch of
the dead. Eva raised the question of whether it is possible to separate the two: “Isn’t it more a
question of degree?” she asked.
Eva: For I’m a little unsure, what do you actually mean by
sensory experiences? Because their presence feels tangible,
but aren’t in the sense of the here and now. So I was sitting
there: Have I ever had sensory experiences? What’s that?
(laughing)
A: No, right. I think you answered a lot of exciting things
But there are some who differentiate a little between that
someone neither sees nor hears, while others see and hear.
Eva: Yes, because there are after all degrees of things as
well
A: Yes that could be
Eva: For jeg er litt usikker på, hva mener du egentlig med
sensorisk opplevelser? For de kan føles konkret, men det er
jo ikke det i den forstand som her og nå. Så jeg satt og
tenkte: Har jeg hatt sensoriske opplevelser? Hva er det? (ler)
A: Nei, ikke sant. Jeg synes du svarte mye spennende på det.
Men det er jo en del som skiller litt på det at noen verken ser
eller hører, mens andre ser og hører
Eva: Ja, for det er jo grader av ting også
A: Ja det kan det være
Earlier in the interview she also commented on this:
Eva: That’s why I say that having heard grandma is the only
like purely sensory, but I have also sensed skepticism and I
have sensed curiosity, so it's a question about definitions,
really.
Eva: Det er derfor jeg sier at det at jeg har hørt farmor er det
eneste sånn rent sensoriske, men jeg har jo også kjent
skepsisen og jeg har kjent nysgjerrigheten, så det er jo et
definisjonsspørsmål, egentlig.
Jorunn created a new category within the sense of presence. She distinguished between a sense of
presence when you only feel that the dead is somewhere around, and a second category where you not
only feel the presence, but you can, more strongly, position the dead in the room (still without any
sensory perceptions).
A: When you say strong... can you describe the difference
between less strong and strong?
Jorunn: Guess it is like with dad I have sort of… There is no
physical presence, yet I have sensed that he is almost
physically there. But with grandpa I have just in a way felt
that he… I know he is around me. I know he sees me. But
with my father I have sensed that he is there, that I perceive
him, that I all the time... Such as in the house we lived in,
that I knew which chair he was sitting in where in the living
room he was. And that I have never experienced with
grandpa. I just in a way knew he was somewhere in the
room.
A: Når du sier sterk… kan du beskrive forskjellen på mindre
sterk og sterk?
Jorunn: Det er vel dette her at far har jeg liksom… Det er
ingen fysisk tilstedeværelse, men likevel har jeg kjent at han
nesten er der fysisk. Med morfar så har jeg bare på en måte
kjent at han… Jeg vet at han er rundt meg. Jeg vet at han ser
meg. Men med far har jeg kjent at han er der, at jeg
fornemmer han, at jeg hele tiden… Sånn som i det huset vi
bodde i, at jeg visste hvilken stol han satt i, hvor i stua han
befant seg hen. Og det har jeg aldri hatt med morfar. Han
har jeg bare på en måte visst at han er her et eller annet sted
i rommet.
Thus, the characterization of the PDP perceptions became more nuanced than the two categories of
sense of presence and sensory perceptions with which had I started. Jorunn created a third category,
and Eva questioned whether it was possible to make a clear distinction between the two, and asked for
degrees.
158
Siri also talked about degrees: She expressed the idea of putting the different nuances within a
continuum. According to Siri, the sense of presence is at one end of the continuum, and the voice of
her son speaking through the telephone, and her table that suddenly started to tremble, are at the other
end. Between these two poles there are lots of other experiences. Siri also reflected on the blurring of
the more vague sense of presence with her wish to feel a presence. The clearer sensory experiences,
she stated, are less open to interpretation regarding what is happening.
Siri: I believe that if one can think of this as a sort of
continuum, then I think that alongside this presence we are
talking about now, there lies my wish about presence and
that’s something else. Do you understand what I mean? And
I can get lost in that terrain. So, if you can think about this
table and the first telephone conversation, that's completely
in that end of the continuum. The other end is where I don't
have any contact at all and I just feel sorry for myself, or in
other words where life is completely different. Then there
are many over here, right?
Siri: Jeg tror at hvis man kan tenke seg dette som et sånt
kontinuum, da, så tror jeg at ved siden av dette nærværet vi
snakker om nå, så ligger mitt ønske om nærvær og det er
noe annet. Skjønner du hva jeg mener? Og i det terrenget
kan jeg gå i surr. Altså, hvis du kan tenke dette bordet og
den første telefonsamtalen, det er helt i den enden av
kontinuumet. Den andre enden er der hvor jeg ikke har noe
kontakt i det hele tatt og bare er lei meg, eller altså hvor livet
er helt annerledes. Så går det mange bortover her, ikke sant?
Summing up the characteristics of the sense of presence experiences and the sensory perceptions
which have been presented in section 6.1 so far, one can conclude that the quality of the visual
perceptions differs in intensity and clarity: from vague perceptions of shadows, to more corporal
images, and on to visions in which one easily recognizes the dead from visual characteristics, such as
clothes, a smile or haircut. Likewise, the auditory perceptions can be heard as rather vague sounds
coming from movements which are interpreted as indicating the presence of the dead, to clear voices
resembling the voices of the deceased. When visual, auditory and possibly also tactile perceptions are
combined, the experience increases in vividness. Smell and touch are not nuanced in the same way,
probably because it is more difficult to distinguish between vague and clear smells and touches. There
are also fewer cases of these modalities. However, the bodily feeling of touch is compared to the
bodily feeling of a sense of presence, and the touch is probably perceived as clearer when the hand
resembles the hand of a particular dead person.
What can be seen from the material is that many of the participants themselves made distinctions
between the more sensory experiences and the sense of presence, as did Siri, Marianne and Gunnar.
But the distinctions are not entirely clear. Eva questioned the sharp distinction and introduced the
notion of grades. Jorunn constructed a category of a specified sense of presence, which falls between
the sense of presence and the sensory experience, and which points to a more nuanced approach to the
categorization, while Siri introduced the idea of a continuum.
If I take this further and draw a line from the vaguer to the clearer perceptions, sense of presence can
be seen as falling at one end of the continuum. Sense of presence is part of the wider phenomenon of
PDP, and is sometimes easy to distinguish from the more sensory perceptions, and sometimes more
159
difficult, as when the distinctions are more blurred. For instance, some of the participants said they
could hear a voice inside their head, whereas others said that it came from outside, but both claimed
that it was a voice belonging to someone else, and that it was a sensory perception. Some said that
they didn’t hear a voice, but still received thoughts (which were not their own thoughts) from the dead.
If I gather together the different descriptions of the PDP experiences and place them in a continuum of
vividness, it can be described in the following way:
Sense of
presence
Feeling the
dead is
somewhere
close
More physical
sense of
presence
Can feel where
in the room the
dead is
Seeing and
hearing more
vaguely, eg.
shadows, sound
of steps
Full "sensory"
experience,
visual, auditory,
tactile
Figure 6.1.8 Continuum of PDP perceptions
The figure shows the different categories that can be found in this material, but as there are
overlapping fields it also allows room for further nuances in peoples’ experiences.
Having described the different sensory modalities and the different degrees of vividness, I will now
turn to experiencing the presence of the deceased through the perceived movement of objects.
160
6.1.9.
“The burglar alarm is living its own life since he died”
Signs of presence
I didn’t ask specifically about it, but yet several of the participants told stories about electricity that
suddenly was switched off, flowers falling out of the vase, pots and pans that moved to other places in
the kitchen, tables shaking for no obvious reason, doors that were locked during the night, clocks that
suddenly stopped, and finding several coins on the floor, among others.
Siri narrated how her table started to shiver when she was trying to sell her apartment by putting an
advertisement up on the webpage, finn.no.
Siri: And then I looked at Finn.no, and there was a tulip vase
here, on this table here. It is so rickety so I won't show it.
Then this table started to go like this… just like this… the
tulips stood and swayed like this, and I sat here, right, I sat
here by the PC and turned around and looked at the tulips
and turned around and the table made such noise and it said
clack, clack, clack… So I thought it was an earthquake. And
then I thought; is it an earthquake or is it N? I had a thought.
I called Kjeller the next morning, because this was after all
in the evening, I called and I asked: “Excuse me, has there
been an earthquake at V?” (laughs) But there hadn’t. So that
was it. So then a couple of weeks passed by. I had new
tulips and I thought, well, well, well I might as well visit
Finn.no one more time. So then the exact same thing
happened, and then I believed that it wasn't an earthquake.
Then I'll tell you, it just want bang with the PC again, and I
said: “N, is that you? I won't look at Finn.no” After that
have I never been to Finn.no again.
Siri: Og så gikk jeg inn på Finn.no, og da stod en sånn
tulipanvase oppå her, på dette bordet her. Det er så
vaklevorent så jeg skal ikke vise. Så begynte dette bordet å
gå sånn… helt sånn... tulipanene stod og svaiet sånn, og jeg
satt her, ikke sant, jeg satt her ved PC en og snudde meg og
så på tulipanene, og snudde meg og det bråkte det bordet og
sa klikk, klikk, klikk.. Så jeg tenkte at dette er jordskjelv. Og
så tenkte jeg; er det jordskjelv eller er det N? Jeg hadde en
liten tanke. Jeg ringte til Kjeller neste morgen, for dette var
jo på kvelden, jeg ringte og spurte: “Unnskyld meg, har det
vært jordskjelv på V?” (ler) Det hadde det ikke. Så det var
det, liksom. Så gikk det noen uker. Jeg hadde nye tulipaner
og jeg tenkte, vel, vel, vel jeg får vel gå en gang til på
Finn.no da. Så skjedde det samme igjen, og da trodde jeg
ikke det var jordskjelv. Da skal jeg si deg, da bare pang
igjen med PC en, og så sa jeg: “N, er det deg? Jeg skal ikke
se på Finn.no.” Siden har jeg aldri vært inne på Finn.no.
Many of the participants perceived that their electricity supply was troubled: Lights started blinking,
there was a crackle on the telephone line, burglar alarms and smoke alarms turned on and off. “When
I talk on the telephone there are very often several strange sounds on the line. And I have experienced
that the lights on the Christmas tree start blinking,” said Torill.
Thomas, who has also experienced electric troubles, connected the crackle with his brother. Thomas
was aware of the notion that it is common to experience the presence of the dead through changes in
electricity, but he also connected the experience to his brother, because his brother was a “gadgetgink”
161
Thomas: Over at my momma's there are a whole lot of those
electricity things. He was a type of “gadget- gink.” He was
really into electricity and electronics and those kinds of
things. Over there, among other thing, it’s like the burglar
alarm lives its own life after he died, up there with momma.
She had a workman come up to take a look at it, and they
took out the battery and even then the siren didn’t stop. So
this workman said that this place is haunted, like right out.
And it is his way of teasing us, to put it that way, with
electricity. For they say that everyone who's dead is very
into electricity and those kinds of things. No, I feel it’s just
super exciting
Thomas: Borte hos mutter er det masse sånn strømgreier.
Han var jo sånn “gadget- fyr.” Opp med strøm og
elektronikk og sånne ting. Oppe der er det sånn at blant
annet tyverialarmen lever sitt eget liv etter at han døde, borte
hos mutter. Hun hadde en servicemann til å komme og se
på, og de tok ut batteriet og likevel så stod alarmen og ula.
Så han servicemannen sa at her spøker det, sånn rett ut
liksom. Og det er hans måte å erte oss på, for å si det sånn,
med strøm da. For dem sier at alle som er død er veldig på
elektrisitet og sånne ting. Nei, så jeg synes bare det er
kjempespennende
Tomas and his mother checked for natural causes for setting off the burglar alarm, and when the
serviceman could not find any electrical reasons for the unusual timing of the siren, Thomas attributed
the happenings to his dead brother.
In Liv’s case, she told that the whole electricity system went off, and was blacked out in two local
areas: around their home and around the home of a friend of the deceased. During this time the
mobile-net went off as well, and so did all the computers in the house. These things happened
simultaneously, and in the specific area surrounding the place where the dead lay in his coffin in the
family’s living room, some days after his death, with 60 family members and friends present in the
house. After three hours the electricity came on again. A friend checked with Hafslund, the electricity
delivery company, but they did not understand what had happened. In telling her story, Liv
emphasized the strangeness of the experience, and stated: “It is not likely that these happenings have a
natural cause, it must be the dead making the noise”.
Liv: And a friend of my son's checked with Hafslund and
they didn't understand what it was because it was completely
localized. It was only at B. But then we also later got to hear
that it was at a good friend's of H, who lives by K at R cafe.
At her place the power also died. And when she walked here
she thought it was so weird. Because she walked from home
and was coming here, and there were lights everywhere, just
not in her house, before she came to B. Here everything was
dark. And it was very peculiar. For computers and mobile
networks, they are not the same network. So it was very
peculiar.
Liv: Og en venn av sønnen vår sjekket med Hafslund og de
forstod ikke hva det var for det var helt lokalt. Det var kun
på B. Men så fikk vi også høre etterpå at det var hos en god
venninne av H, som bor ved K på R kafé. Hos henne gikk
også strømmen. Og da hun gikk hit syntes hun det var så
rart. For hun gikk jo hjemmefra og skulle hit, og da var det
lys alle andre steder, bare ikke i hennes hus, før hun kom til
B. Her var alt mørkt. Og det var veldig spesielt. For pc’er og
mobilnett, det er jo ikke det samme nettet. Så det var veldig
spesielt.
Trouble with the electricity supply was interpreted as a sign from the deceased, and this even occurred
during the interviews. As I mentioned in the method chapter; during interviews 3, 8 and 14 my mp3
player ran out of battery. This could obviously be due to lack of adequate charging, but two of the
interviewees had another explanation. They believed it was the dead who created the trouble, just to
say hello. The flat mp3 player resembled other experiences with troubled electricity that they had
interpreted as signs from the dead, and therefore they had a big laugh when it happened during the
162
interview, saying that the deceased often showed a sense of humor and wanted to poke fun at them
now and then. They found it quite natural that the dead would be present during an interview when
they were the subject of conversation.
The signs of presence were frequently accompanied by a sense of presence. That is, together with the
peculiar movement of objects, the experiencer had a feeling that the dead person was present. Vidar
told about an experience with a sudden and intense change in the weather, which was accompanied by
an intuitive feeling that his father was present. It happened at the country house which belonged to his
father, 6-12 months after his death. Both Vidar and his wife observed the movements, and felt it was
his father.
Vidar: .. and had such an intuitive feeling that he in a way
had been there then. It was… And this is the whole story,
really, but in no way like… any apparition, any gestalt, any
person, any voices, any exchange. Nothing like that. Just a
mixture of a physical event and an unconscious, and
eventually conscious, or a type of immediate link to him.
Vidar: .. og hadde en sånn intuitiv følelse av at han på en
måte hadde vært til stede da. Og det er hele historien
egentlig, men på ingen måte en sånn… noe framtoning, noe
gestalt, noe person, noe stemmer, noe utveksling. Ingen ting
sånn. Bare en blanding av en fysisk hendelse og en ubevisst,
og etter hvert bevisst, eller en sånn umiddelbar kobling til
ham.
When I asked what made him believe it was his father, Vidar claimed he didn’t exactly know,
although he offered some thoughts on the matter:
A: Can you say anything more about what makes you think
it was him?
Vidar: No. (pause) Well, it's not because I don't want to.
A: No, I understand.
Vidar: It was just an [immediate] experience. And it comes
down to question two. Because one can – or I can - make
many reflections about it and one can make many reflections
about it, but what shall I say? First and foremost that maybe
it was a strong experience, something that happens,
something that is uncomfortable. This can of course be
connected to this place and connected to him who died not
too long ago. Now it wasn't like right after the burial. We
are talking about either a half year or a whole year. I think a
whole year, it’s the following year in the spring, but it may
also have been the fall. So why do I make this connection, I
mean this entirety thing could just be me connecting these
two things together. The weird thing, and that which
strengthens it, are that those who were in the house
experienced the same thing, and also found it to be
completely natural and they completely agreed that .. that’s
what it was.
A: Kan du si noe mer om hva som gjør at du trodde det var
han?
Vidar: Nei. (pause) Altså, det er ikke fordi jeg ikke vil.
A: Nei, jeg skjønner.
Vidar: Det var bare en opplevelse. Og det går egentlig på
spørsmål to det der da. Fordi man kan jo – eller jeg kan gjøre meg mange betraktninger og man kan gjøre seg mange
betraktninger om det, men hva skal jeg si? Først og fremst at
det er kanskje en sterk opplevelse, noe som skjer, noe som
er ubehagelig. Det kan jo selvfølgelig kobles til dette stedet
og kobles til ham som var død for ikke så lenge siden. Nå
var det ikke sånn umiddelbart etter begravelsen. Vi snakker
om enten et halvt år eller et helt år. Jeg tror et helt år, det er
året etter utpå våren, men det kan også ha vært på høsten. Så
hvorfor jeg gjør denne koblingen, altså dette kan jo i sin
helhet ligge hos meg som kobler disse to tingene sammen.
Det rare, og det som forsterker det, er at disse som var inne i
huset opplevde det samme, og også fant det som helt
naturlig og var helt enig at… jo det var det.
Vidar’s reflections on the connection of the perception with his father pointed towards the explanation
that it could just be a connection made in his head, probably facilitated by the fact that at that time he
was at the country house of his father. However, he described some characteristics of the experience,
which, in a way, went beyond his own mental thinking or associations. The experience happened one
year after the death of his father, so it was not particularly obvious that he was thinking of his father at
163
that time, and furthermore, the connection between the change in the weather and the presence of the
dead father was also experienced by Vidar’s wife. For Vidar, the perception of a change in the
weather was most likely not a sign from the deceased, but rather a combination of feeling the presence
of his father and the movements of objects (brought about by the weather, through wind and air
pressure changes) that were difficult to explain.
A connection of the movement of objects with a particular dead person was not always accompanied
by a feeling of the presence of that person. When Marianne found feathers in the bathroom, she didn’t
connect the feathers to her brother through a sense of his presence, but through the peculiarity of the
experience. Marianne further considered her interpretation to be her choice. As I will return to in
section 7.1, she used her available interpretive resources. However, the character of the experience
also made her believe that this was her brother. She could not find any natural reason for feathers
appearing in her bathroom, and therefore the presence of her brother was an alternative interpretation.
Marianne: All of a sudden I can go into the bathroom in the
morning and I'm going to brush my teeth, and I don't have
any type of birds or anything, so to speak. I have nothing
which makes it natural that there are feathers in my
bathroom in the middle of the morning, so I have chosen to
believe it then… that it‘s his way of saying that he has
passed by, or I don't know (laughs). Then I always smile, I
feel it's very cozy.
Marianne: Plutselig kan jeg bare gå inn på badet om
morgenen og skal pusse tenna, og jeg har ikke noe sånn
fugler eller noe, for å si det sånn. Jeg har ikke noe som gjør
at det er naturlig at det skal være fjær på badet mitt midt på
morgenen, så det har jeg valgt å tro da… at det er hans måte
å bare si at han har vært innom, eller jeg vet ikke (ler). Da
smiler jeg alltid da, synes det er veldig koselig.
Thus, the participants’ decisions to deliberately consider alternative interpretations for their
perceptions of objects, was connected to the possibility of a more natural interpretation. What can be
seen from the material is that many of the perceptions of signs of presence could have had a natural
cause. Melodies on the radio that were suddenly reminders of the dead (Elisabeth), coins found in the
apartment (Marianne), a butterfly sitting outside the door on the stairs for four days (Elisabeth), and
Christmas tree lights that were blinking (Torill), were all happenings that could occur within the
commonly accepted laws of nature, but which were interpreted as a sign from the deceased. On the
more extraordinary side were experiences of flowers that dropped out of a vase (Jeanette), a table
which started trembling (Siri), sheets of papers that jumped up and down (Liv), and doors that were
suddenly locked (Linda).
When the participants interpreted the movement of object as a sign from the deceased, they often
underlined the peculiarity of the happening, and they told that they had checked it for a natural cause
by, for instance contacting Hafslund the electricity company, or Kjeller, the company doing
seismographic measures. When they could rule out a natural explanation, they expressed it as being
easier to interpret the experiences as supernatural, and caused by spirits of the dead.
164
In summing up, there are several experiences related to the movement of objects. Some of them could
easily be connected to a “natural” cause, while others are more difficult to explain in that way. Some
of the objects had a connection with a particular dead person, but other experiences did not
immediately have a connection to a particular father, mother etc. In these cases, the movement of
objects is sometimes accompanied by a sense of the presence of the dead. If there is no sense of
presence experience, the link between the movement of objects and the deceased person can be made
as a choice against the background of the perceived peculiarity of the experience. Presumably, other
interpretive resources can also influence the interpretation, as for instance worldview, which I will
come back to in chapter 8. Common to all the participants, except for one, is that the reported
movement of objects is interpreted as a sign from the deceased.
6.1.10. Summary and reflections
In the summary and reflection I will take the analysis of chapter 5 a step further and move towards a
more interpretive position. I will also connect the findings to extant literature.
The analysis, so far, has characterized how the participants described and conceptualized their
experiences. There seemed to be a variety of ways of experiencing PDP, through different sensory
modalities, with nuances in the sense of presence experience, which can be described as on a
continuum, and with different experiences of the movement of objects, interpreted as signs of the
presence of the deceased.
The experience through different perceptual modalities corresponds to findings in other relevant
research (Hayes, 2011; Steffen & Coyle, 2011; Klugman, 2006; Haraldsson, 1988). Dennis Klass,
whom I presented in the theory chapter, in 2.2, characterizes the different perceptual modalities when
he operationalizes what it means to have an interaction with what he calls an inner representation. He
describes this as “a sense of presence, seeing, hearing, smelling, touching, or talking of the deceased;
belief in the person’s continuing active influence on thoughts or events; or incorporation of the
characteristics or virtues of the dead into the self” (Klass, 1999: 40). This reflects the different ways
of experiencing PDP, as can be found in this project, as well as in other research.
The sense of presence experience, which is the most common experience in the material, is difficult
describe, partly due to its lack of clear sensory qualities (Steffen & Coyle, 2012). However, the
165
participants’ way of putting words to their experiences, corresponds with other research describing the
experience as a “a feeling of presence of the deceased which is difficult to pin down in terms of the
known senses” (Bennet & Bennett, 2000; Grimby, 1998), a “general, non-specific awareness of
presence” (Dateson & Marwit, 1997), “a vivid feeling of an imperceptible presence” (Haraldsson,
1988), and “the non-material quasi-sensory subjective (but experienced as veridical) feeling of
presence of the deceased which tends to occur unexpectedly” (Steffen & Coyle, 2011).
The sense of presence experience was also characterized many years ago by William James in his
lectures in 1902 on religious experiences:
It often happens that a hallucination is imperfectly developed: the person affected will feel a
‘presence’ in the room, definitely localized, facing in one particular way, real in the most
emphatic sense of the word, often coming suddenly, and as suddenly gone; and yet neither
seen, heard, touched, nor cognized in any of the usual ‘sensible’ ways (James 1902/2010: 49).
The experience of sense of presence is an imperfect hallucination, according to James. It is
distinguished from a sensory experience (a hallucination in James’ terminology), and one is usually
conscious of its coming and conscious of its departure, and it comes suddenly, as a spontaneous
experience. It is also possible to localize it. This corresponds to my participants’ descriptions of a
“feeling of presence”, a “feeling of contact”, a “feeling of relationship”, and the “feeling he is in the
room.” The participants also reported that they knew when the feeling of presence came and went. I
will come back to that in section 6.2.
Thus, the descriptions of the PDP perceptions in the present study seem to correspond with the
conceptualization in other research. However, what is novel among the present findings is the
conceptualization of two types of sense of presence experience where one is feeling the dead to be
“somewhere around”, while the other is more specified, in a particular place in the room, but still not
engaging any of the senses.
To conceptualize the PDP perceptions on a continuum, from a sense of presence to clearer sensory
perceptions, introduces more nuances into the categorization of PDP experiences. In the Continuing
Bonds paradigm, there have been some attempts to distinguish between different forms of bonds with
the dead. Nigel Field’s concepts of externalized and internalized expressions of continuing bonds, was
mentioned in the literature review, in chapter 2. (Field, Nichols, Holen, & Horowitz, 1999; Field &
Filanosky, 2010). Field’s quantitative surveys divided the continuing bonds expressions into two
categories,127 whereas a qualitative approach is able to describe more nuances in the different
127
In an earlier version he has, however, three categories; sense of presence, using the deceased’s possessions, and using
memory (Field et al., 1999).
166
experiences as visualized in the figure 6.1.8. While Field uses just two categories to study
adaptiveness and maladaptiveness in the continuing bonds expressions, and concludes that the
externalized expressions are more maladaptive than are the internalized, one may ask what his
explanation would be for the different experiences in between. The material of this study shows that
the same person may have both internalized and externalized continuing bonds expressions. This
finding questions the role of the type of experience in adaptation to grief. I will return to this point in
the discussion in Part III.
Both the perceptual character and the content points to the PDP experience as being qualitatively
different from an encounter with a living person, but also different from the perceiver’s memory or
internal voices. The dead are described as something more transparent and shining than the
appearance of a living person. The substance is non-material, as the dead can walk through walls, but
still the appearance can feature familiar clothes. The touch is felt as softer. The perceptual character
is not perceived in the same way as when seeing, hearing or feeling a living person, it is more on the
“inside.” Yet, it is different from a memory, and this raises the question of how to place this
qualitatively different experience in the self. I will come back to this point in the discussion in Part
III. Now I will turn to the time and timing of the PDP experience.
6.2. Time
When the PDP experiences happen will be the subject of the next section. I will analyze the time span
and frequency of the experiences. Further, I will investigate whether the experiences happen
spontaneously, or if it is possible to control the timing. Finally, I will make a brief comment on how
the timing and frequency are interpreted by the participants in relation to grief. This last focus points
towards chapter 8, which analyzes meaning making and grief.
6.2.1 “I have had regular contact with him for 25 years”
Time span and frequency
Among the participants in this group, the frequency of PDP experiences varied from one single
experience (Vidar) to feeling the presence almost every day (Jeanette, Linda, Torill, Elisabeth,
Thomas, Liv, Vigdis). However, the more sensory experiences didn’t happen very often. It was the
167
sense of the presence of the dead that made up the daily or weekly PDP experiences. For some of the
participants (Elisabeth, Thomas and Liv) the signs of presence happened more often than did the
visions, auditions, touches and smells of the dead, but still not so often as the sense of presence.
For most of the participants the first experience occurred quite soon after the death, and the last
experience had happened not long before the interview. Apart from Vidar, who reported only one
incidence of PDP, and Rune who didn’t think the experience would happen again, all the other
participants had experienced PDP perceptions close to the time of the interview, and expected to
continue to experience the presence in time to come. The time span since the death of their family
member or friend up until the interview varied from 2 years up to 30 years. Consequently, several of
the participants had experienced the continuing presence of the dead for many years (see table 5.2.).
Some of the participants stated that the frequency had declined over the years. The PDP was
experienced less often, and the perceptions had become less intense. Berit said:
A: Is it like it has become less and less?
Berit: Yes it's probably just like less… intense. In the
beginning I saw him more often, especially there outside the
bedroom
A: Er det sånn at det har blitt mindre og mindre?
Berit: Jo det er nok mindre... intenst sånn. I begynnelsen så
jeg nok han oftere, særlig der utfor soverommet
Others claimed that it was just as frequent as it had been several years before, but most of the
participants emphasized that it tended to occur during certain periods of the year. For Gunnar this was
the case. Although the frequency for Gunnar had declined over the years, there were certain times
when the experiences would occur more frequently.
A: Mm. So it's no less often now?
Gunnar: Yes it is, it is. It is much more seldom. But once in
a while, then there he is again (grinning slightly).
A: Is it possible to say something… is it half a year inbetween, or?
Gunnar: No, it is not. It’s in certain periods. So like now
when I'm working on a project at home with my carpentry
and then it's more often than if I don't do that, so it can really
vary. He can be there one two three times in the course of
one day, and then several weeks can go by.
A: Mm. Så det er ikke sjeldnere nå?
Gunnar: Jo, det er det, det er det ja. Det er mye sjeldnere.
Men av og til så er han der igjen (flirer litt).
A: Går det an å si noe… er det et halvt år imellom, eller?
Gunnar: Nei, det er det ikke. Det er jo i perioder. Sånn som
nå så holder jeg på med et prosjekt hjemme med snekring og
da er det oftere enn hvis jeg ikke gjør det, så det kan jo
variere veldig. Han kan jo være der en to tre ganger i løpet
av en dag, og så kan det gå flere uker.
Thus, the PDP experiences could diminish over time, or could be just as frequent, but overall the
participants reported that they usually happened during particular periods of time.
However, there was also another pattern evident in the stories of the interviewees. Some of the
perceivers had their first PDP experiences years after the death. Ruth, Marianne and Vidar didn’t
experience PDP right after the death, but much later. For Ruth, her first visual perception occurred 16
or 17 years after the death of her husband. Marianne did have a dream a year or so after the death of
168
her brother, but apart from that, she did not experience any PDP until between 5 and 10 years after her
brother’s death. Vidar’s perceptions happened closer to the death of his father, but even so, 6 months
to a year had gone by after the funeral before he experienced the presence of his father.
Ruth: It’s been seventeen years since he died and then, in
that state of shock and everything that’s happened. It's only
first now in these later years that all these thoughts have
arrived, or feelings, to have such a strong connection with
those on the other side... and to such great extent … and very
... yes, very, I like it.
Ruth: Det er sytten år siden han døde og da, i den
sjokktilstanden og alt det som liksom har vært.. Det er først
nå i de senere årene at det er kommet alle disse tankene,
eller følelser, å ha så veldig forbindelse med den på den
andre siden… og til de grader og…og veldig… ja, veldig,
jeg liker det.
The late commencement of her PDP experiences was, for Ruth, connected to her being in a particular
state of mind. The shock she experienced when her husband collapsed and died on the floor in their
living room had, according to Ruth, held back the PDP experiences. Now, however, several years
later, and turning 80 years old, she felt she had moved into another mental state, and the PDP
experiences accordingly started to happen. When Ruth told in the interview about her experiences of
“feeling a connection with the other side”, she referred to it as something which had suddenly started
and which still happened. It was not something she had consciously introduced. This was also the
case with Marianne and Vidar. Thus, it is possible that PDP experiences first occur spontaneously,
many years after the death.
6.2.2 “She can appear at the most bizarre moments”
Spontaneity of the PDP experience
I will now analyze further the spontaneity of the perceptions. That is, if the participants have the
possibility of timing the schedule of their PDP experiences, or if is they are beyond their control. I
start with an episode in the middle of an interview with Linda.
Sitting in Linda’s living room in her home in the northern part of Norway, with me in the sofa and
Linda in an armchair, Linda suddenly exclaimed that her dead friend had taken her place on the sofa
between us:
Linda: But I have a friend who died two years ago who is
always here giving me messages. I have her physically. She
is here now as well.
A: You can see her?
Linda: Yes, yes she’s sitting there and she’s patting herself
and she says «tullsjur»
A: What did you call it?
Linda: Silly-hen (laughs) she says to me
A: (laughs) How does she look?
Linda: She’s sitting there, in that chair ..
Linda: Men jeg har en venninne som døde for to år siden
som stadig er her og gir meg beskjeder. Hun har jeg fysisk.
Hun er her nå og.
A: Du kan se henne?
Linda: Ja, ja hun sitter der og hun klapper seg og hun sier
«tullsjur»
A: Hva kalte du det?
Linda: Tullehøne (ler) sier hun til meg
A: (ler) Hvordan ser du henne?
Linda: Hun sitter der, i den stolen ..
169
Linda expressed that the presence of her dead friend distracted her, and made her almost a little
nervous. She had not asked the dead friend to come. It had just happened. According to Linda, it was
not very convenient in the middle of an interview.
Linda: (laughs) Now… so she's interrupting now, bothering
me in my conversation (the dead friend has sat down on the
sofa again and is communicating with Linda). Ehh.. (laughs)
Do you know what she’s asking for? Who is that lady there?
A: (laughs)
Linda: So, I lost track because now she is…
A: Now she is there
Linda: Yes, now she is in a teasing mood, just to get me off
track. Ehh, K never liked that we spoke positively about her.
She doesn't like praise, bragging, and I think that's the
reason why she is forcing me off track. I completely lost
track! Ah!
A: If you answer her now…
Linda: Then I get an answer back. Yes, yes. But all she says
and all she does when I speak with her, it's with a smile. So
also if it is very serious (laughs).. I'm grinning because she’s
in fact grinning at me. Can you stop? (addressed to the dead
person on the sofa). I'm completely losing track. Ehh.. do
you know that this is very gross, it is very embarrassing,
because I don't normally lose track. Those who know me
know that my mouth runs a mile a minute, always, and that I
have a good understanding of myself. But she’s an expert in
making me lose track. And she did it now again. Quite
completely. So, can you repeat the question?
Linda: (ler) Nå… altså hun avbryter nå, forstyrrer meg i min
prat (den døde venninnen har tatt plass i sofaen igjen og
kommuniserer med Linda). Ehh.. (ler) Vet du hva hun spør
etter? Hvem er hun dama der?
A: (ler)
Linda: Altså, jeg datt helt ut for nå er hun…
A: Nå er hun der
Linda: Ja, nå er hun i ertehjørnet altså, bare for å få meg til å
spore av. Ehh, K liker aldri at vi snakker om henne i positiv
retning. Hun liker ikke ros, skryt, og jeg tror det er det som
gjør at hun nå sporer meg helt av. Jeg datt helt ut! Åh
A: Hvis du svarer henne nå..
Linda: Så får jeg svar igjen. Ja, ja. Men alt hun sier og alt
hun gjør når jeg snakker med henne, det er med et smil.
Altså om det er gravalvorlig (ler).. Jeg flirer jeg for hun
sitter faktisk og flirer til meg. Kan du slutte? (henvendt til
den døde i sofaen) Jeg detter helt ut. Ehh.. vet du dette her er
kjempeekkelt, det er kjempeflaut, for jeg pleier ikke å spore
av. Den som kjenner meg vet at kjeften min går som en
pepperkvern, alltid, og jeg har veldig god selvinnsikt. Men
hun er ekspert i å få meg til å spore av. Og det gjorde hun nå
også. Helt fullstendig. Altså, kan du gjenta spørsmålet ditt?
Linda made it clear that her deceased friend K had suddenly appeared. According to Linda it was
probably because we talked about her in the interview. K then disappeared, only to return some
minutes later. As with this sudden appearance of the deceased friend on the sofa, almost all the other
participants told, in different ways, that they didn’t have any control of when the dead would show up.
They could not decide when it would happen. Elisabeth explained it in the following words:
A: Is it outside your control?
Elisabeth: This is so abstract. It’s like outside on a different
frequency or another channel, so… the strongest experiences
just come. It's not like I require or request them.
A: Er det utenfor din kontroll?
Elisabeth: Dette er jo så abstrakt. Det er liksom utenfor på
en annen frekvens eller en annen kanal, så... de sterkeste
opplevelsene de kommer bare. Det er ikke det at jeg krever
eller ber om det.
Although the experiences, particularly the stronger sensory experiences, just came, and the participants
emphasized that you could not just call the dead and expect an answer (Siri), the interviewees tried to
find patterns for the frequency of their PDP experiences. Eva, for instance, claimed that the presence
of the deceased had to do with how she was doing. In stressful and difficult situations, it was more
likely that one of her grandparents would make their presence felt. However, she stated that she could
never be sure if they would come, and that she had also been surprised by the timing of their
170
presences. Linda assumed that the appearance of her friend in the interview had to do with talking
about her, but still, the deceased’s presence came spontaneously. Consequently, judging from Siri’s,
Elisabeth’s, Eva’s and the other participants’ accounts, it is not possible to create a rule or a pattern
that works in all situations. Eva elaborated on the timing of her PDP perceptions in the following
statement:
A: When was the last time you experienced or sensed your
grandma or grandpa?
Eva: (laughs) Days or weeks? Yes, grandpa's been a long
time, but grandma passes by occasionally. It depends on
how I feel. It's like, if I'm having a difficult time then they
are present to a greater extent. But I can just as often, and
it‘s perhaps a kind of distinction that might be interesting…
It often happens that I get to thinking about grandma, that I
say something, without perceiving that she's present or that I
get an answer. So it’s mostly that one needs a person to talk
to without one needing to talk to oneself. You address
someone else. So it doesn't actually match up. She's not
always here and I have only gotten a concrete answer once,
and I actually became a little surprised about it. (laughs)
A: Do you think it’s less often now than earlier?
Eva: No, it has nothing to do with time, it has to do with
how I am doing. Quite simply.
A: So it has nothing to do with the place either?
Eva: No, nothing to do with the place, aside from when I’m
at the cottage in the summer, her parents built that house
and she grew up in it and her children grew up there, so I
perceive her there perhaps more often than here. Because
when I’m here it’s more how I’m feeling and if I need
support quite simply.
A: Når var siste gang du opplevde eller fornemmet farmor
eller farfar?
Eva: (ler) Dager eller uker? Ja, farfar er lenge siden, men
farmor er innom sånn litt innimellom. Det kommer an på
hvordan jeg har det. Det er sånn, har jeg det litt ekstra
vanskelig så er de her til stede i enda større grad. Men jeg
kan like ofte, og det er kanskje et sånt skille som kan være
interessant… Det hender ofte at jeg henvender meg til
farmor i mine tanker, at jeg sier noen ting, uten at jeg
fornemmer at hun er til stede og uten at jeg får svar. Så det
er jo også mest sånn at man trenger en samtalepartner uten
at man trenger å snakke til seg selv da. Man henvender seg
til noen andre. Så det henger ikke sammen. Hun er ikke her
bestandig og jeg har bare fått konkret svar en gang, og jeg
ble egentlig litt overrasket over det. (ler)
A: Er det blitt sjeldnere nå med tiden, synes du?
Eva: Nei, det har ikke noe med tid å gjøre, det har med
hvordan jeg har det å gjøre. Rett og slett.
A: Så det har ikke noe med sted å gjøre heller?
Eva: Nei, ikke noe med sted å gjøre, bortsett fra at når jeg er
på hytta om sommeren, altså hennes foreldre bygde den
hytta og hun vokste opp der og hennes barn vokste opp der,
så fornemmer jeg henne nok kanskje litt oftere enn her. For
når jeg er her er det mer hvordan jeg har det og om jeg
trenger støtte rett og slett.
Even though Eva addressed her grandmother in her thoughts, she was never sure that she would feel
her presence. And even though she experienced that the dead came more often when she was at the
cabin, she could not be sure that her grandmother would be present when she was there. Accordingly,
Eva explained that the presence of the dead is connected neither to time nor to space. The most likely
explanation, according to Eva, is that the dead will come when the living is having a difficult time.
But she adds that one can never be sure about that, either.
Similarly, Thomas stated: “It has to do with my state of mind, but he doesn’t always come for that
reason. It comes and goes. It can also happen when I am having a good time.”
171
Thomas: No, it’s more about my mood. It goes a little up
and down. You can miss him and feel it’s pretty shitty, but
he doesn't have to be there for that. But then you can sit
quietly for a while and feel that (pinches) suddenly he's
there. If you sit on his gravesite for example. It can be such
a place where it's easier to get… not contact… but if you're
tuned in yourself and it is a little more of these frames and
you see his name on the tombstone and so on. The first you
think is that this is like strong, it’s pretty shitty. Ehh… and
on Christmas eve if we drop by before dinner with like the
family. It ‘s then that it is rougher when there are these
family things which he should have been there for. But it
comes and goes. And it can actually come when you are
happy and satisfied and when things go well and such things
too.
Thomas: Nei det går litt på sånn sinnsstemning. Det går litt
sånn i bølgedaler. Du kan savne ham og synes det er for
jævlig liksom, men han behøver ikke være der for det. Men
så kan du sitte stille en stund og kjenne at (knips) plutselig
så er han der. Hvis du sitter på gravstedet hans for eksempel.
Det kan være et sånt sted der det er enklere å få .. ikke
kontakt.. men om du er tuna inn sjøl og det er litt mer sånn
rammer og du ser navnet hans på gravstedet og sånn. Det
første du tenker er at det er sterkt liksom, det er for jævlig.
Ehh.. og på julaften hvis vi er oppom der før vi skal i
familiemiddag liksom. Det er da det er tøffere når det er
sånn familie ting som han skulle være der. Men det det
kommer og går. Og det kan egentlig komme når du er blid
og fornøyd og når går det bra og sånne ting og.
Vigdis and Jeanette identified the same experience: that the perceptions were spontaneous and came
and went. They suggested, however, that the perceptions came more often when they were “more
open”, for instance when they didn’t have too many other things to think about. Jeanette added that
knowing she would be interviewed about her PDP experiences had made her more open, because
being asked questions about the deceased led her to “tune in” to him, and this had, according to
Jeanette, resulted in more experiences in the days before the interview.
There was only one exception to the reports that the experiences came spontaneously, and that was
Torill’s account.
A: Yes. So I understand that there are multiple entryways.
Sometimes LA comes without you asking about it…
Torill: Yes, she is just there
A: Yes, and other times then it is you who...
Torill:... says that “now it would be lovely if you came, LA”
A: Does she always come then?
Torill: Yes. Mm
A: Ja. Så jeg forstår det slik at det er flere innganger. Noen
ganger kommer LA uten at du har bedt om det...
Torill: Ja, hun bare er der
A: Ja, og andre ganger så er det du som…
Torill:.. sier at “nå hadde det vært deilig at du kom, LA”
A: Kommer hun alltid da?
Torill: Ja. Mm
Torill stated that she could ask her dead daughter to come, and that she would always come when
asked. But Torill also added that her dead daughter often came without her asking her to. Torill
further said that she could ask her dead daughter to leave, and she would then disappear. Apart from
Linda, who also spoke about asking the dead to leave, this was not an issue in the stories of the other
participants, as the perceptions did not last for very long and were usually welcomed.
Summing up, the PDP experiences are mostly beyond the control of the experiencer. This does not
mean, however, that the dead comes totally unexpectedly. Sometimes the experiencer is surprised, but
this was not always the case. The living can do certain things in order to enhance the likelihood of a
PDP experience, and thus be more prepared. However, they are not in control and can never be sure
that it will happen. Some of the participants tried to find a pattern for understanding the timing and
172
frequency of the experience—for instance that the dead mostly come when they are needing someone
to visit them, when they are in certain places, or at certain times of the year, like Christmas and
birthdays, or when they talk about the dead in a particular way (as in the narrative with Linda, above),
or if they do certain things, for instance they “open up”, “tune in” or “meditate.” But even if the dead
are more likely to come at certain places, or when the living to do certain things, they can never be
sure if the dead will make their presence felt.
When the participants interpreted the timing and frequency of their experiences, the stories of time
were in some cases linked to an understanding of grief and crisis. Because the experience can happen
years after the death, it was believed that it is not only a close distance to the loss that will bring about
such an experience. There are also factors other than grief, or a crisis, that can “cause” the PDP
experience. I will come back to this point in chapters 7 and 8.
6.2.3. Summary and reflections
In this section on time, I have analyzed that the PDP perceptions may decrease, both in number and
intensity over time. I have also seen that they can continue with the same frequency, or they can
increase and even happen long after the death. Regardless of the frequency, the experiences can
continue for years. In this material, the participants had experienced their PDP perceptions for up to
30 years post loss.
This long-lasting continuing presence corresponds with earlier research on sense of presence which
has found that these experiences can go on for many years. They may decline, and become less
intense, but they still continue to happen (Bennet & Bennet, 2000; Parker, 2005; Rees, 1971, 2001;
Walter, 2007).
The time schedule of the experiences is not orderly, is varying in frequency, and is related to certain
periods. For most of the participants this is connected to their state of mind, or it is connected to
certain places. However, the participants find no rule that can confirm that the PDP perceptions will
always come in those particular situations. PDP experiences can also appear in other, unexpected
situations.
Klugman (2006) makes a distinction between PDP experiences128 that happen spontaneously, and PDP
experiences that happen when performing certain actions, for instance being near objects related to the
128
Klugman calls it “post death contact” (Klugman, 2006).
173
dead, or being in certain places. The latter can be considered a more deliberate way of setting up a
contact. However, in the light of the material of the present study, there is not a clear line between the
active and deliberate, and the passive and spontaneous. If one makes a distinction between an active
form of PDP, where the living does something in order to call on the dead, and a passive form of PDP
where the living has no influence, the findings in this study point to a more complex model, where the
experiences are mainly out of the experiencer’s control, yet the experiencer could increase the
likelihood by doing certain things, thus bringing in some active elements. Apart from one participant,
who claimed to be able to call on the deceased, all the others said that regardless of the active elements
they could never be sure when the dead would come. They could also be surprised by the appearance
of a PDP experience, when they were doing nothing consciously to precipitate it.
In the introductory chapter (see section 1.2.2) I mentioned Tony Walter’s variables of interactions
between the living and the dead. One of the variables, which I left open to analysis, was whether the
living seeks the contact, or whether the dead is perceived to come unbidden. Walter suggests placing
the different interactions on a spectrum, from the spontaneous to an active search for the dead (Walter
2007). The different grades of deliberateness can also be found in my material. Making a continuum
based on the findings of the present material can be thus be illustrated like this:
Spontaneous
surprising
experiences
Wishing the
dead will
come
Internally
asking the
dead to
come
Going to
certain
places or
doing certain
things
Deliberate
practice
through
medium or
ritual
6.2.3. Degrees of active and passive contact
The illustration shows the degree of active initiative from the living in order to obtain contact with the
dead. In the spectrum there are actions that may be difficult to regard as either active or passive, for
instance wishing the dead would come. Overall, regarding the timing of the actual experiences, this
continuum does not indicate that the dead will necessarily show up if one moves to the right and
deliberate side of the spectrum. Thus, even in the more deliberate acts there is a large element of
spontaneity. In my study, the deliberate practice, through a medium, is not the focus of the study on
174
PDP experiences, but it will be included in the interpretation and meaning making of the experience,
which I will turn to in the next chapter.
Another finding related to time is that PDP experiences can happen for the first time many years after
the death. I will come back to this when analyzing grief, but for now I will suggest that these findings
challenge grief theories claiming that sense of presence and sensory experiences are a grief reaction
occurring right after the death, and that PDP results from “searching behavior” in an early phase of
grief where the bereaved restlessly looks for the dead (Bowlby, 1998; Field, 2008; Parkes,1972, 1996).
This chapter has further indicated that time is related to space. When the living seek to find a pattern
of when the PDP experiences will occur, they note that they often relate to places—resulting in the
belief that the deceased are more often present when they are at certain places. I will now turn to the
question of where PDP is experienced.
6.3. Space
The following analysis focuses on space. It is divided into three main parts. The first part investigates
the physical space. That is, where the living is when he or she experiences PDP. The next part
analyzes perceptual space, which means where the dead is perceived to be in relation to the living
person’s self—between the “outside” and the “inside” of the living. The third part analyzes the
participant’s placement of the dead in a metaphysical space. This is where the participant thinks and
feels the dead is, and this relates to the interpretive resources of the perceiver. I will finally make a
short comment on space and worldview, which points towards chapter 9.
6.3.1. “She is not in the bathroom, not in the toilet and not in the bedroom”
Physical space of the PDP perceptions
The PDP experiences mostly happened in familiar places. This could be in places where the
participants often stayed, or in places that were important to them, or it could be in places that were
important to the deceased while they were living. However, it could also happen in a lot of other
places.
The most common place was in the living room at home. Almost all the participants placed some of
their perceptions in the living room. The cabin was also reported as a place for PDP perceptions by
175
quite a few of the participants. In contrast, the deceased’s grave was not a significant place in their
narration of PDP. A couple of the participants did mention the grave as a place where they sensed the
presence of the deceased. However, the most vivid perceptions were not placed there. Mostly the
graveyard was not mentioned, or else it was specifically pointed out as a place where the dead did not
show up in a PDP manner. It was rather a place for memories. “He has never been in the church
yard”, Ruth claimed. “His body is in the graveyard, but his presence is felt at home or at the cabin.”
Berit said the same: Her dead husband had disappeared from the grave when the lid was put on his
coffin. In the coffin, at the graveyard, he is now just a body. According to Berit, when the coffin was
standing in the church, on the day of the funeral, her husband was not in the coffin, but he was
somewhere else in the church.
Berit: I sat and I looked down into the grave where they had
lowered it. Then I actually felt that he disappeared from
there. When I saw the casket down there. I said farewell up
there in the bedroom, and next time when we...when I laid
him in the casket and placed on the lid. That we did together
(pause)
A: Then he wasn't there anymore
Berit: No, that was for me. Then he was just a body. But I
felt after all that he was one place or another in the church
Berit: Jeg satt og så nedi graven der de hadde senket den. Da
følte jeg egentlig at han forsvant derfra. Når jeg så kista der
nede. Jeg tok avskjed der oppe på soverommet, og neste
gang når vi… når jeg la over han i kisten og la på lokket.
Det gjorde vi sammen (pause)
A: Da var han ikke der mer
Berit: Nei, det var for meg. Da var han bare kropp. Men jeg
følte tross alt at han var en eller annen plass i kirka
In the narrations of PDP perceptions, the sensory perceptions were often connected to a particular
space, as for instance Berit perceived her deceased partner at her childhood home—where they had
spent quite some time together while he was alive. The connection with a particular space was often
made without my asking for the placement of the deceased. The following comment makes this clear:
Berit: When I have seen him at K, then I have… when he
comes walking… It's a completely special situation. Very
often he comes walking up the road… there’s a hill up to the
house, he comes walking up there. Or he sits outside, there’s
kind of a brick wall. So he liked to sit outside and read the
newspaper, he basically liked to sit there for he was so good
in his work. There my mother sees him too. She alleges that.
She sees him in the same places, in the road when he comes
up towards the house and out on the wall. This is what she
says she feels. She sees him, but she also sees him on the
other side of the kitchen table where he sat. There I don’t
see him that much. Because they had very good contact.
They sat on their respective sides of the table.
Berit: Når jeg har sett ham på K, da har jeg… når han
kommer gående... det er en helt spesiell situasjon. Det er
veldig ofte han kommer opp veien… det er en bakke opp til
huset, han kommer gående opp der. Eller at han sitter ute,
det er sånn murkant. Så han likte å sitte ute og lese avisen,
så han likte å sitte der i det hele tatt for han var jo flink å
jobbe. Der ser mamma han og. Hun påstår det. Hun ser ham
på de samme plassene, i veien når han kommer opp mot
huset og ute på muren. Det sier hun at hun føler. Hun ser
ham, men hun ser ham og på andre siden av kjøkkenbordet
der han satt. Der ser ikke jeg ham sånn. For de hadde veldig
god kontakt. Da satt de på hver sin side av bordet.
From this quote, it is evident that Berit’s mother can also see Berit’s deceased partner, at the same
places that Berit can see him, but also at a particular place, in the kitchen, where Berit does not see
him.
176
Siri also narrated her experiences in relation to space. She reflected on how she is able to remember
details of the place where she was at the time of her PDP perceptions. “It is so strange,” Siri said,
“because I remember so well where I am when I have these experiences.”
To summarize: As I analyzed in section 6.1, the sense of presence experiences involves a less concrete
placement of the deceased than the sensory perceptions do. The sensory perceptions most commonly
occur in places that either the bereaved or the dead are affiliated with. Some recognized that there are
places where they never have PDP experiences, as Linda claimed: “She is not in the bathroom, not in
the toilet and not in the bedroom.” Eva stated clearly that she does not connect the PDP perceptions
with different places in such a way that certain places “produce” PDP perceptions. “This has nothing
to do with the space” she said. Thus, the dead do not have to come when the perceivers are in
particular places. When and where the PDP happens is mainly beyond the control of the experiencer.
As I concluded in the section on time, the perceptions are mainly spontaneous, but with some
likelihood of their happening at certain times, and in certain places.
6.3.2. “Outside” and “inside” the head
Perceptual space of the PDP
I will now explore further the perceptual space of the PDP experiences. As I already have touched on,
when analyzing the quality of the PDP perceptions, some of the participants claimed that the
difference between a perception of a living person and that of a dead, had to do with the placement of
the perceptions.
Eva described how she could see her grandparents “inside her head.” However, at the same time, she
placed the dead outside of her, but without being able to choose the place. This placement was,
according to Eva, different from memories, which are more deliberately located in places where she
can remember the deceased.
177
A: You said something about when you saw your
grandfather and your swimming buddy that you saw them in
your head. This might be a difficult question, but is it
possible to describe that in contrast to a memory? Thus,
from when one thinks about that person who is dead at a
burial.
Eva: Mm. So, it is such a tangible placement. Thus, if it had
been a memory then I ‘m thinking about him. If I’m thinking
about grandpa, then I'm remembering him when he sat in his
chair the last time before he died, those kinds of things. But
he had a very tangible – and it was the same with TE
(swimming buddy) – he had a tangible place in the church.
So, I didn't choose this. The first time I experienced this, it
was like this: What is going on? So then I didn't dare to ask
if anyone else experienced such things, but then I later
understood that it's not common (laughs). And especially
when I didn't experience grandpa in the same way, so…I
couldn't have moved him. He was sort of in place. That's the
difference. Plus that he was… So I’m not thinking about my
grandpa or grandma or my other grandpa in my memories as
anything… then they are in a place either at the cottage or
home where they lived, or... They are never here or in the
church or in my memories. So that's the difference. As
memories they are situated in places where memories
belong, but the sensations are in places where I have not
placed them.
A: Du sa noe om da du så farfaren din og svømmekompisen
din at du så dem inni hodet. Det er kanskje et vanskelig
spørsmål, men går det an å beskrive det til forskjell fra et
minne? Altså, at man tenker på den som er død i
begravelsen.
Eva: Mm. Altså, det er en så konkret plassering. Altså, hvis
det hadde vært et minne da tenker jeg på ham. Hvis jeg
minnes farfar, minnes jeg ham når han satt i stolen sin siste
gang før han døde, sånne ting. Men han hadde en helt
konkret – og det samme var det med TE
(svømmekameraten) – han hadde en helt konkret plassering i
kirkerommet. Altså, jeg valgte det ikke. Første gangen jeg
opplevde det, så var bare sånn: Hva er det her for noe? Så
turte jeg ikke å spørre noe om noen andre opplevde ting,
men så skjønte jeg i etterkant at det er jo ikke vanlig (ler).
Og spesielt når jeg ikke opplevde morfar til stede på samme
måte, så… Jeg kunne ikke ha flyttet ham. Han var liksom
plassert. Det er forskjellen. Pluss at han var – altså jeg
tenker aldri på verken morfar eller farmor eller farfar i mine
minner som noe.. da er de i en setting enten på hytta eller
hjemme der de bodde, eller .. De er jo aldri her eller i kirka
eller i minnene mine. Så det er forskjellen. I minnene er de
plassert på steder der minnene hører hjemme, mens i
fornemmelsene er de på steder som ikke jeg har plassert de.
Similarly, Elisabeth characterized the experience as talking to herself inside her head. “It is like when
I am talking to myself inside my head, in a way”. She insisted that she does not hear a voice, and as
such, this experience is a vaguer form of PDP perception (see section 6.1.8.).
Siri, on the contrary, presented a clearer auditory experience when she reflected on the voice of her
son as coming “from outside.”
A: I have a question which is probably a bit difficult to
answer, but.. these experiences, especially these two which
you describe where you have spoken with him, is it possible
to say any more about how you hear this voice, in contrast
from how you hear me now?
Siri: I would say that it comes from the outside (low,
emphatic voice) even if that's absurd. But I will say that it
comes from outside. Yes. I believe I will say that it is an
inquiry. You know, I have many voices in my head, but I’m
very clear about when I speak with myself with all these
different voices, if you understand, but it's not like that. It's
qualitatively different, and then I think I'll almost borrow
N's expression: You can't explain it. Right? (pause) It is his
voice. It is his voice! Right? It is his voice. It is not mine.
These are not my thoughts, if you understand. These are not
my thoughts speaking with my thoughts. No. It is his voice
(pause).
A: Jeg har et spørsmål som nok er litt vanskelig å svare på,
men .. disse erfaringer, særlig disse to som du beskriver hvor
du har snakket med ham, går det an å si noe mer om hvordan
du hører den stemmen, til forskjell fra når du hører meg nå?
Siri: Jeg vil si at den kommer utenfra (lav, ettertrykkelig
stemme) selv om det er absurd. Men jeg vil si at den
kommer utenifra. Ja. Jeg tror jeg vil si at det er en
henvendelse. Du vet, jeg har mange stemmer inni mitt hode,
men jeg er veldig klar over når jeg snakker med meg med
alle de forskjellige stemmene, hvis du skjønner, men det er
ikke sånn. Det er kvalitativt annerledes, og da tror jeg nesten
jeg låner Ns ord: Du kan ikke forklare det. Ikke sant?
(pause) Det er hans stemme. Det er hans stemme! Ikke sant?
Det er hans stemme. Det er ikke min. Det er ikke mine
tanker, hvis du skjønner. Det er ikke mine tanker som
snakker med mine tanker. Nei. Det er hans stemme (pause).
Thus, the perceptual space was perceived as both on the “inside” and on the “outside” of the head. It
was however distinguished from memory and from thoughts on the one hand, and from conversation
178
with seen, living people on the other hand. As reflected in section 6.1, the identity of the voice or
vision pointed towards another person. As such, it was not one’s own thoughts but the other’s voice or
vision—placed somewhere between the inside and the outside of oneself.
6.3.3. “It’s nothing geographical, that’s the whole point”
Metaphysical space
On a more interpretive level, yet also closely connected to their perceptions, is the participant’s
placement of the dead in metaphysical space. This section elaborates on where the participants think
and feel that the deceased are after death.
Thomas reflected on how the deceased can be in different places, and reasoned that the presence of the
deceased exceeds the framework of time and space. It is not geographical.
Thomas: But how they can be everywhere and no place,
how can they be in Bergen and in the mind of that person
who then … that connection… it’s therefore you see that the
entirety is so large that you can be a little afraid when you
think about it and know how they manage to see the
possibilities to be there. It’s nothing geographical, this is the
whole point. There’s no frame anymore. There’s no space or
time or…If you let it go, then there’s no problem. But we
have to constrain ourselves to some things. You know, this
is the difference between them and us.
Thomas: Men åssen de kan være over alt og ingen steder,
åssen de kan være i Bergen og inne i hue på det mennesket
som da .. den connection der… det er derfor du ser at
helheten er så stor at du kan bli litt redd når du tenker på det
og kjenner på hvordan dem klarer å se mulighetene til å
være der. Det er ikke noe geografisk, det er det som er hele
poenget. Det er ikke noe ramme lenger. Det er ikke noe rom
eller tid eller… Hvis du lar det gå, så er det ikke noe
problem. Men vi skal forholde oss til noe greier. Det er jo
det som er forskjell på dem og oss.
Some of the participants placed the dead in another dimension, which is beyond the framework of
time and space. For Eva, the idea of dimensions went together with the perceptions of particular
energies that she can feel. She used her feelings to locate the dead as existing in another dimension
and in another state, which did not include the worldly dimensions of time and space. The
understanding of another dimension came because she felt that “they are not here, but neither are they
away.”
Eva: So for me then it’s very clear that this is about
dimensions. One enters into another state. So they are not
down in the ground. Yes, the physical shell absolutely does,
but their energy does not, because then I would not have felt
it.
Eva: Så for meg så er det veldig tydelig at det er snakk om
dimensjoner. Man går over i en annen tilstand. Så de ligger
ikke nede i jorda. Ja, det fysiske skallet gjør jo selvfølgelig
det, men energien deres gjør ikke det, for da hadde jeg ikke
kjent den.
The “other dimension” was not easy to locate. Elisabeth located it outside, on another channel, or
frequency. Siri pointed to the notion of a place we don’t see. “We don’t see something that we could
see because we have limitations”, was Siri’s explanation.
179
Siri: So when you ask where he is, then I can at least say
that I don't know (laughs). And I can also say that I’m
looking for him. But... he can be anywhere. I believe it is
something we don't… really, I believe we don't see
something which we could see. That’s the best answer I can
give. Because I do not believe it is heaven, really it's not
that, it is something we don't see. There is very much we
don't understand. There’s something we don't see. And that's
our limits. Eh.. yes. So I don't believe he's in my head or in
my body. I also don't believe he’s in heaven. It could very
well be heaven for that matter, really, I'm not so certain…
and he isn't in the soil. So I'm not so certain if we must go
neither down or up. (pause, thinks) No, and what it is I do
not know. But… (pause)
Siri: Så når du spør hvor han er, så kan jeg i hvert fall si at
jeg ikke vet (ler). Og jeg kan si også at jeg leter etter ham.
Men… han kan være hvor som helst. Jeg tror det er noe vi
ikke… altså jeg tror vi ikke ser noe som vi kunne sett. Det er
det beste svaret jeg kan gi. For jeg tror ikke det er himmelen,
altså det er liksom ikke, det er noe vi ikke ser. Det er veldig
mye vi ikke forstår. Det er noe vi ikke ser. Og det er våre
begrensinger. Eh..ja. Så jeg tror ikke han er inni hodet mitt
eller inni kroppen min. Jeg tror heller ikke han er i
himmelen. Det kan godt være himmelen for den saks skyld,
altså, men jeg er ikke så sikker på.. og ikke er han nede i
jorden. Så jeg er ikke så sikker på om vi må verken ned eller
opp. (pause, tenker) Nei, og hva det er det vet jeg ikke.
Men… (pause)
Siri could not locate the deceased, nor whether they were to find “up” or “down.” She certainly felt
her son was somewhere, but she could not point to a particular place. The placement went beyond
space. Liv had heard the voice of her son telling her that “I am closer than you think.” Even though
Liv used the concept of heaven to articulate the placement of her son, she felt that his place in heaven
was perhaps not up in the sky, but closer to her.
Thus, the participants found it hard to place the dead as being either up or down, or in any
geographical dimension when they tried to feel the direction. But several pointed towards a
dimensional space, where the dead are in another dimension, or at another frequency from living
people.
Although some of the participants used their feelings to locate the dead, most of them also drew their
interpretations from the cultural resources of religion and spirituality. Rune stated clearly that it was
impossible for him to answer the question of where the dead were because he didn’t have a worldview
that provided an answer to that. Rune asserted that “I don’t know where he is. I don’t have a
Christian worldview”. He suggested, however, that his father was taken “further on”, but he could not
say to where.
As I will return to when I analyze worldview in chapter 9, the ideas of “heaven”, of “another
dimension”, “the light”, and “the other side” are used as cultural resources, together with the
sensational feelings, to understand perceptions that go beyond time and space. The use of religious
resources is thus connected to space.
180
6.3.4. Summary and reflections
The PDP experiences happened in different places, but most often in places that were often used by the
dead, or in places that were important for the living. In terms of perceptual space, the participants
placed the PDP perceptions somewhere between the inside and the outside of their own body.
However, the metaphysical space went beyond the categories of time and space. The participants felt
that the dead were close, but not in the same way that a living person would be, and thus they placed
the deceased in another dimension, a parallel world. As some of the participants had experienced that
the dead could communicate with different people at the same time, this dimension exceeded the
normal boundaries of time and space.
This placement between the “inner” and the “outer” is also reflected in other research: Leudar and
Thomas, in their study of verbal hallucinations, point to the dichotomy between inner and outer that is
used in cognitive psychology. Inner is equivalent to what is in the brain, or in the head, as cognitions
are said to coincide with brain processes (Leudar & Thomas, 2000). Outer is beyond the body. In
Leudar and Thomas’ study this is not necessarily how their informants interpreted their experiences of
hearing voices. Rather the “inner” and “outer” could have various contingent meanings. In their
phenomenological study they found, for instance, examples of a twofold outer; one supernatural which
is the participant’s own “outer”, and one mundane “outer,” which is shared with others.
The idea of a perceptual placement between the inside and outside is also reflected by Dennis Klass.
Klass, in his research on bereaved parents, finds that the perceptual space of the PDP experience is
both an outer and an inner reality (Klass, 1999). In the framework of the Dialogical Self Theory, the
space between the inner and the outer can be seen as an interrelation between imaginative and
physical space. Both Dialogical Self Theory and Continuing Bonds Theory describe the self as
lacking clear boundaries between the inner and the outer, although operating within both an inner and
outer space. I will come back to this in the discussion chapter, in Part III.
In addition to the physical and perceptual space, most of the participants also placed the deceased in a
metaphysical space that is perceived to be beyond geography. Taken together, one could say that the
deceased are perceived in a three-dimensional space: on a “horizontal plane” between the inside and
outside of the perceiver, and simultaneously in a “lateral dimension” that place them in the room (on a
chair, behind the curtain etc.), and on a “vertical” plane (although not always placed as something
upwards) in another dimension. Yet, this last placement is contingent on a belief in the continued
existence of a soul.
181
In this chapter I have explored the spatial placement related to the participant’s sense of space. I have,
however, mentioned that the placement is also related to the cultural and religious resources of the
participants. In chapter 9 I will elaborate more on the cultural voices in meaning making.
182
6.4. Summary and findings
Before moving on to the next chapter, I will summarize the main findings of chapter 6 in the following
points:

The different modes of sensory perception can be seen on a continuum, moving from a vague
sense of presence, to a more located sense of presence, to sensory perceptions of shadows and
sounds, and to full and vivid sensory perceptions.

The PDP perceptions are distinguished from thoughts, memories or speaking to oneself on the
one hand, and from encounters with living people on the other hand.

The PDP experiences in this material are mainly spontaneous, but there are nuances which
bring in some elements of control, and call for a more complex model than dividing the
perceptions into active and passive forms of PDP.

The perceptions can last for many years and they can also emerge several years after the
death.

The perceptual space can be localized as being between inside and outside of the mind and
body of the living.
These findings will be taken further in the next chapter on meaning making. According to the
Dialogical Self Theory, when the participants attempt to make meaning of their PDP experiences,
different voices will come into play, also some collective voices. When it comes to the vividness and
spontaneity of the perceptions, some voices are quite normative. One can perhaps comment that the
more one moves towards externalized sensory experiences, or full sensory perceptions, the more some
(groups of) psychologists become worried. However, the more one moves towards an intended or
active presence, the more some (groups of) clergy become worried (Walter, 2007). How the
participants use those collective and social voices, together with a complexity of other voices, will be
one of the questions to be considered in the following.
The long time span covered by the perceptions will be analyzed further in the chapter on grief and
grief theories, in order to see how PDP perceptions can be linked to grief. The metaphysical space
will be analyzed further in the chapter on worldview. Finally, the perceptual space will be discussed
in relation to Dialogical Self Theory and Continuing Bonds Theory in the discussion chapter.
183
184
Chapter 7: MEANING MAKING OF POST DEATH
PRESENCE
In the following chapter I will analyze meaning making of the PDP experiences in a broad sense. I
will first identify the interpretative resources that the participants use when they make sense of their
PDP experiences. These resources are in line with the theoretical approach of Dialogical Self Theory,
seen as the collective and individual voices in the extended self. Collective voices are, according to
DST, infiltrating individual voices, and can be identified from, for instance, professional jargon,
sociopolitical ideologies, and religious language (Hermans, 2012). In addition to identifying and
recording the collective voices in the language of the participants, I will draw on the participants’ own
reports of their cultural resources, their worldview and how and with whom they have shared the
experience and its interpretation, for instance with church leaders, television programs, or friends.
Secondly, I will analyze meaning making as valuations of the experience. This corresponds to
meaning as significance129 and to the concept of valuation from the DST. The chapter focuses on the
participants’ valuations and their connected feelings and thoughts, be they positive, negative or
ambivalent, and on the function of the experience for the experiencer.
In line with DST, I view the voices in the self which engage in the meaning making process as
containing cognition, emotion and action. However, one of these modes may be more to the fore in
certain situations. For instance, when I ask about an understanding of the experience, the sense
making may be more cognitively voiced, and the significance of the PDP experiences may be more
emotionally voiced, although it doesn’t have to be that way. I see cognition, emotion and action as
intertwined in complex ways, and, as I will show in the coming analysis, the voices can be both
rational and emotional, they can argue and scream, and they can be fostered through action.
129
See introduction chapter for a discussion of the concept of meaning making as sense making and its significance.
185
7.1. Voices in sense making
In chapter 5 I analyzed how the participants used the particularities of their perceptions, for instance a
recognizable tone in the voice, familiar clothing, the well-known shape of a hand, typical things that
the deceased would have said or done, and more diffuse feelings of the person’s energy, in order to
make sense of the identity of the phenomenon and of the perception. Cultural voices are, however,
also intertwined with the immediate reflection and used in the identification of the perceptions. I have
touched upon the cultural resources in chapter 6, and will now elaborate on them further. In addition
to making sense of who they perceive to be present, and where and when it happens, the participants
make sense of why this experience happens, or how it could happen. This sense making, with its use
of cultural resources and voices, is the topic of the coming chapter. The sense making was, in some
cases, brought out in the interviews at the initiative of the participants. In other cases, it was in answer
to my question about how they understood the experience.
7.1.1.
“He is so attached to me”
Biographical and relational interpretations.
In the interview, Jeanette was asked about her understanding of her experience. She had previously
identified her perceptions as her son, and as such, had made sense of the perceptions in an immediate
response. Now I asked for a deeper interpretation:
A: What do you think it is? You think it is him, but how do
you understand it?
Jeanette: I know it is him, and I know that mom is here. And
there has been someone here who will try to remove them,
and they did not succeed with that. And there were more
along with C then, and they got them away, but not him. I
have taken it up later, and then I have gotten word about that
he is so tied to me that I must go before they can get him
out- for him to get peace, and go to the other side.
A: Yes, mm. What do you think about that explanation?
Jeanette: Yes, I have voiced my agreement about this ...
A: Hva tror du det er? Du tror jo det er ham, men hvordan
forstår du det?
Jeanette: Jeg vet det er han, og jeg vet at mor er her. Og det
har vært en her som skal prøve å fjerne dem, og de lyktes jo
ikke med det da. Og det var jo flere sammen med C da, og
de fikk de vekk, men ikke ham da. Jeg har tatt det opp
senere, og da har jeg fått beskjed om at han er så knytta til
meg at jeg må ut for at de kan få ham vekk- for at han skal
får fred da, og gå over til den andre sida
A: Ja, mm. Hva tenker du om den forklaringen?
Jeanette: Jo, jeg har jo sagt meg enig i dette da…
Jeanette’s interpretation of her PDP experiences pointed towards the close relationship with her
deceased son. Her sense of understanding went as follows: Because her son was attached to her and
connected to her while he was alive, he is still present. This interpretation was suggested by a psychic
medium, and Jeanette agreed with the interpretation. It made sense to her. The close relationship with
her son was perceived as the reason why it was hard to make him leave (something she had considered
doing, with the help of a psychic medium), and thus why he was (still) there. As I will return to, there
186
was also another form of sense making in Jeanette’s narrative, which used the concept of an existing
spirit surviving bodily death. It is, however, the relational aspect which was salient in Jeanette’s first
presentation of her sense making in the interview: her close relationship with her son. Jeanette’s son,
who committed suicide after some difficult years with a mental disease, at the age of 29, was in
Jeanette’s eyes, very compassionate and caring towards her, and Jeanette thought that this closeness
was the reason for their continued relationship.
On the other hand, some of the participants had deceased close family members and friends with
whom they did not experience a presence. None of the participants provided a clear explanation for
that phenomenon, which they all found very strange. However, some had a suggestion which pointed
towards a relational and biographical interpretation, as Eva articulated in the following statement:
Eva: .. and for the most part grandma and great-grandma
who follow me. I had expected that grandpa would do that
as well, But I have seen nothing of him (laughs). He just
died.
A: What do you think about that?
Eva: No, I don't know. I believe it’s a little weird in a way,
but in another way I have later experienced through
conversations with my mom among others that grandpa was
not such the solidly secure person I thought he was. Maybe
he has something he needs to set straight. I don't know.
Maybe he’s not attached to me in that way.
Eva: ..og stort sett farmor og oldemor som følger meg. Jeg
hadde forventet at morfar skulle gjøre det også, men han har
jeg ikke sett noe til (ler). Han bare døde.
A: Hva tenker du om det?
Eva: Nei, jeg vet ikke. Jeg synes det er litt snålt på en måte,
men på en annen måte har jeg erfart senere gjennom
samtaler med mor blant annet at morfar var nok ikke så solid
trygt menneske som jeg oppfattet ham som. Kanskje han har
litt å ordne opp i. Nei jeg vet ikke. Kanskje han ikke er
knyttet til meg på den måten.
Eva suggested that the personality of her grandfather resulted in there being some work for him to do
on “the other side”, and thus he was too busy to seek her out. Additionally, her grandfather’s
relationship to her was raised as a possible explanation for her lack of PDP experiences with him.
Possibly there has to be a certain relationship in order to experience PDP with the deceased, was Eva’s
suggestion. This did not mean that a close relationship was seen as a prerequisite for experiencing
PDP, in Eva’s view. Eva was one of the participants who could feel the presence of people other than
those she had been close to. But, she thought that the relationship could play a part. However, this
interpretation was very tentative.
Gunnar also brought up the relational aspect in his interpretation of his experience. His attachment
and close connection to his parents was suggested as a way to make sense of his perceptions. In the
first place, the presentation of the idea of a close relationship as sense making came after an initial
narration of what happened in the fire when he lost his parents. After the narration Gunnar added “but
I was very attached to my parents.” It was hence not a direct answer to my question about
understanding the phenomenon, and as such it reflected Gunnar’s spontaneous sense making in the
interview. Later in the interview, Gunnar further reflected on the relational side when addressing the
fact that his brothers didn’t seem to have PDP experiences of their parents in the same way that he did.
187
Gunnar: I have two brothers and I have not heard that they
have these experiences
A: What do you think about that?
Gunnar: No, I don't know. I have thought that they’re quite a
bit older than me though, really I have a much closer
relationship to my parents than they did, so that… and I
was… when we moved to B then they had already moved
away and were out of the house, so I was the one who had
the closest relationship with my parents. It could have to do
with that, I don't know.
Gunnar: Jeg har jo to brødre og jeg har ikke hørt at de har
sånne opplevelser
A: Hva tenker du om det?
Gunnar: Nei, jeg vet ikke. Jeg har jo tenkt det at de er jo en
god del eldre enn meg da, altså jeg har jo et mye nærmere
forhold til foreldrene mine enn hva de hadde, sånn at.. og jeg
var jo… da vi flyttet til B så var jo de allerede reist bort og
var ute av hjemmet, så jeg var jo den som hadde nærkontakt
med foreldrene mine. Det kan jo ha med det å gjøre, jeg vet
ikke.
Gunnar’s statement was tentative. He put forward the possibility that the PDP perceptions could have
to do with his relationship with his parents, but he was not sure. As with Jeanette and Eva, Gunnar
also combined his interpretation of PDP, as being an expression of a close relationship with the
deceased, with another interpretation, which I will come back to in section 7.1.3
Most of the participants brought in their relationship with the deceased as part of their sense making.
The relational interpretations were closely connected to the participant’s feelings of presence and their
experience of functions of the perceptions. As Eva stated: “I don’t know what this is all about, the
only thing I know is that they are here and do protect me”. She did not have a clear theoretical
explanation for the phenomenon, but it made sense to her in the way that she had experienced and felt
their protection. The relational sense making, was thus also a felt sense making.
Further, a more biographical sense making was also present. This had to do with the perceived
personality and character of the deceased. Elisabeth, Thomas and Liv all suggested that their deceased
brother and son, respectively, were very “spiritual persons” when alive, and as such it was not
surprising that they were now present.
Thus, the relational and biographical sense making is a particular answer to the question of why the
PDP is experienced by just me, and why I can perceive some, but not all, dead family and friends. It is
also an answer to the question of the possibility of PDP experiences. According to some of the
participants, there has to be a certain relationship in order for the perception to happen, although it is
not a total explanation of the PDP phenomenon. Characteristics and relationship to the deceased are,
for some of the participants, enough to make sense of their perceptions. For others these sense making
voices are combined with other voices. I did not trace in the interviews where the idea of the
relationship to the dead as indicative of the PDP perception came from. It could be fragments from
grief theories of attachment130, part of a religious or spiritual interpretation,131 or it could come from
130
The point would be that a dead attachment figure, someone who has been close, is searched for, and through this
searching phase, PDP experiences happen.
131
For instance, from spiritualism, http://www.snu.org.uk/spiritualism or http://www.spiritualist.no/spiritualisme-146
(read 28.06.13).
188
folk tradition,132 or be a blending of elements from different traditions.133 It is however visible in the
material that this form of sense making is often felt as a close attachment, as well as using collective
voices. The voices are further combined with other ways of understanding why PDP happens in
general. I will turn to that in the next chapters.
7.1.2.
“A connection in my head and heart”
Psychological interpretations
As pointed out in the last paragraph, Gunnar had an additional explanation to a relational interpretation
of a close connection to his parents; namely his state of mind at the time of the PDP experience:
Gunnar: So I'm associating it maybe more with that I was in
a state of mind which made me receptive for… so...so but
really dad and I were very closely attached, or I was closely
tied to both parents
Gunnar: Så jeg forbinder det kanskje mer med at jeg var i en
sinnstilstand som gjorde at jeg var mottakelig for… så…
så… men altså far og jeg var veldig nært knytta, eller jeg var
nært knytta til begge foreldrene,
Gunnar had experienced a terrible shock. He had witnessed his parents’ house burn down, and had
been in a situation from where he was not able to help them out of the fire. The PDP-experience
occurred a couple of weeks after the fire, and Gunnar attributed it to the “drama” and “chaos”. Later
in the interview he told that for a long time he had lost his memory of some parts of that particular
night. Talking to a friend of his who is a psychologist affirmed that this reaction of lost memory was
normal. So, although Gunnar did not use the words crisis or trauma, it raises an association with
theories from that section of psychology. The idea that Gunnar implied in his tentative sense making
seemed to be that a certain state of mind arising from a crisis or trauma may produce PDP experiences.
This allusion to psychological theories thus played a part in his sense making, together with his
relational interpretation.
Vidar also pointed to a mental or emotional connection as possibly bringing about the PDP experience.
For Gunnar, the mental state that he believed made him more open to such experiences was combined
with his belief in the continued existence of his deceased parents (and with a relational interpretation).
For Vidar this was not the case. The feeling of presence was attributed to a connection in the head or
heart, and did not include the existence of the dead as a spirit.
132
133
See, for instance, Romarheim, (2011).
See, for instance, Mc Guire (2008); Bender, Cadge, Levitt, and Smilde (2013).
189
Vidar: So it can just be a type of reflex a type of connection.
Something happened with the weather. I expect that was the
way it was. But the connection happened in my head.
--Vidar: But common to all of them is that they occur in my
head, not to mention heart
Vidar: Så det kan jo bare være en sånn refleks en sånn
kobling. Været skjedde det jo noe med. Det regner jeg med
at bare var der. Men koblingen skjedde jo i mitt hode da.
--Vidar: Men felles for alle de er jo at de foregår inne i mitt
hode, for ikke å si hjerte da
Vidar, who identified himself as an atheist, did not use the religious interpretation of an existence after
death, but located his experience in his mind. Even though Gunnar and Vidar differed in terms of their
understanding of the existence of a soul post death, both of them were using cognitive and affective
interpretations to make sense of their perceptions. This can be seen as a psychological approach to
making sense of the presence of the deceased. Although not presenting a full theoretical system, they
were using fragments which are present in our culture; namely that certain states of mind produce
extraordinary experiences.
The psychological sense making among the participants was also visible in the use of fragments of
grief theories like a “delayed grief reaction” (Marianne), and an understanding of the presence as an
inability to “let him go” (Berit). I will come back to how grief worked in sense making in 8.1.
7.1.3. “In another dimension with the ability to cross the border”
Spiritual and religious interpretations
Fourteen of the 16 participants held the view that the deceased exist as a spirit surviving bodily death.
I have, in 6.3.3, analyzed the participants’ views of metaphysical space, and have seen that when
placing the dead the participants used both their feelings of energy and closeness, and also the
interpretive resources from spirituality and religion.
Eva, for instance, said she believed that the dead exist in another dimension. In the following
quotation it is evident how she reflected on this idea of existing spirits in relation to passages from the
Bible about Jesus after his resurrection. The use of the concept “dimension” was possibly voiced
through friends and literature she had picked up, and now she used it in combination with the Christian
idea of a life after death, which she related to the Bible.
190
Eva: They don't disappear. They disappear out of our
dimension and our world and our physical existence, ehh..
but it’s still an existence which I can no longer direct, but
where they apparently can extend me a hand across the
barrier then.. ehh.. I cannot explain it in any other way. Now
I have never had any sort of theological reflection around
this either, but ( ) I don't remember which of our evangelists
it was, but they don't recognize Jesus because he doesn't
look like how he used to look when he lived
Eva: De forsvinner ikke. De forsvinner ut av vår dimensjon
og vår verden og vår fysiske tilværelse, ehh..men det er jo
fortsatt en tilstedeværelse som ikke jeg lenger kan styre,
men hvor de tydeligvis kan rekke meg en hånd over grensen
da. Jeg kan ikke forklare det på noen annen måte. Nå har jeg
aldri hatt noen sånn teologisk refleksjon rundt dette heller,
men ( ) Jeg husker ikke hvilke av evangelistene det var,
men så kjenner heller ikke de igjen Jesus for han ser jo ikke
sånn ut som han gjorde da han levde
The notion that the deceased still exists is also how Vigdis made sense of her experiences. People do
not actually die, but transform into another state, was her belief. As Vigdis had received education
from alternative spiritual schools, and now works in and relates to spiritual milieus, she naturally used
spiritual collective voices about death as transformation—based on her belief in reincarnation.
Vigdis: How do I understand it? I understand it in the way
that we receive evidence that there doesn't exist any actual
death. That it’s only to go over into another type of state. It’s
likely that which I get out of it. And things are happening all
the time really. Everything is energy. Energy doesn't
disappear, said Einstein (laughs a little). This is what it
means for me.
Vigdis: Hvordan forstår jeg det? Jeg forstår det på den
måten at vi får bevis på at det ikke finnes noen død egentlig.
At det bare er å gå over i en annen type tilstand. Det er vel
det jeg får ut av det. Og at det går i ett egentlig. Alt er
energi. Energi forsvinner ikke, sa Einstein (ler litt) Det er det
det betyr for meg.
Vigdis’ spiritual understanding was also infiltrated by scientific language and a belief that pointed to
Einstein’s theory of an energy that does not disappear—an idea she had probably also learned about in
her alternative milieus.134
7.1.4. “I will not exclude energies and forces communicating across borders”
Parapsychological interpretations
The idea of “remaining energy” also appeared without a spiritual or religious interpretation. Both
Vidar and Rune referred to “energy” and to “forces” that are not visible, but which still can be
perceived by some people. For Vidar this was, however, not his main hypothesis. His main
hypothesis was, as I analyzed in 7.1.2, to locate the experience in the mind. The second hypothesis
was the possibility of a remaining energy, however without being an existent and personified spirit.
Earlier in life, when his parents were still living, Vidar had several experiences of knowing how they
were doing. As they were sick for many years he was able to intuitively catch what was going on,
even from a long distance. He would then intervene and bring them to the hospital when necessary.
134
For the key concept of energy in New Age, and the regard for and use of modern science, see Kalvig (2013); Kraft (2011);
and Hanegraaff (1998).
191
This may have made Vidar open to phenomena which cannot yet be explained in terms of science;
although he made it clear that those phenomena had nothing to do with religion. Neither was it a
personified being.
Vidar: The other hypothesis is that it is – what should I sayin that I experience certain things myself by being able to
guess and understand a little across physical boundaries,
without it being anything I.. (laughs a little) it has always
been like this really – I can very well think that there can be
energy and forces and those kinds of things which can
communicate despite physical places. If it’s a real
communication or if it is one's own ability to assume, that’s
a different case. Then you’re back to the first hypothesis.
But that doesn't exclude that there can be things. Then I
can’t really see that one dies and then one is physically and
spiritually the same person and kind of is sitting up or down
or wherever one finds oneself. So it must be in the form of
things I don't understand and can describe completely which
cause energy and forces to change and live in one way or
another. But I don't envisage any form of personification or
anything like that.
Vidar: Den andre hypotesen er jo at det er - hva skal jeg si i og med at jeg opplever sånne ting selv med å kunne gjette
og forstå litt sånn på kryss og tvers av fysiske grenser, uten
at det er noe jeg sånn.. (ler litt) sånn har det bare alltid vært
egentlig – at jeg godt kan tenke meg at det kan være energier
og krefter og sånne ting som kan kommunisere på tvers av
fysiske steder. Om det er en reell kommunikasjon eller om
det er ens egen evne til å anta eller.. det er jo en annen sak
da. Da er du tilbake til den første hypotesen. Men det
utelukker jo ikke at det kan være ting. Da ser jeg ikke for
meg at man dør og så er man fysisk og sjelelig den samme
personen og liksom sitter oppe eller nede eller hvor man
ville befinne seg. Så det måtte være i form av ting jeg ikke
kan forstå og beskrive helt som gjør at energier og krefter
kan omdannes og leve på et eller annet vis. Men jeg ser ikke
for meg noe form for personifisering eller noe sånt noe.
Related to the hypothesis of energies is the thought that particularly sudden and violent deaths leave
traces or prints which sensitive people can perceive. Rune elaborated on this in the following:
A: You have touched on it.. but if you should say how you
understand it. .
Rune: So, I can't really explain it, but that there is
something… events mark where they happen, yes I believe
that, just like a large plane crash where many people have
died in one place, it’s clear that this leaves a mark on the
place. I believe that. But what it is, I can't explain. We don't
see it, we don't hear it, we must have developed abilities to
receive them in a way.
A: Du har jo vært inne på det.. men hvis du skal si hvordan
du forstår det..
Rune: Altså, jeg klarer ikke forklare det, men at det er noe..
hendelser setter spor der det skjer, ja det tror jeg, sånn som
en stor flyulykke hvor mange folk har dødd på en plass, det
er klart et det setter spor igjen på stedet. Det tror jeg. Men
hva det er, det klarer jeg ikke å forklare. Vi ser det jo ikke,
vi hører det ikke, vi må ha utvikla egenskaper for å ta det inn
på en måte.
In order to make sense of the experience, it was not necessary for Vidar and Rune to use spiritual or
religious interpretations. “I don’t need religion to understand those things” was Vidar’s statement.
This understanding was in contrast to Vigdis who used the concept of “energies” in relation to an
existing spirit. For Vidar and Rune the experience was not spiritual, and made enough sense by being
related to a psychological or parapsychological135 understanding. Yet, Vidar in particular, but also
Rune, asserted that they hadn’t spent much time finding an idea, superstructure or theoretical
framework for their perceptions. Vidar claimed explicitly that he was not interested in such. When
135
The identification of this form of interpretation as paranormal refers to one of the hypotheses put forward in
parapsychology; namely that “unusual electromagnetic or geomagnetic fields may influence susceptible people’s temporal
lobe functioning, causing them to have anomalous perceptions” (Irwin & Watt, 2007: 205). In the case of Vidar this
“physical environment hypothesis” (Irwin & Watt, 2007: 205) was combined with the openness to the possible existence of
the psi phenomena of telepathy and clairvoyance—which are key features in parapsychology.
192
asked about it in the interview, the interpretation offered was a combination of psychological and
physical phenomena, where the former provided the main hypothesis.
7.1.5.
“There has been one in each generation having this”
Genetic interpretations.
Another way of making sense of the perceptions, and which was put forward by some of the
participants, was to refer to PDP perceptions as a quality or trait which is inherited, and hence
represents the experiences of a particular family.
Vigdis, for instance said: “But my mother was quite clairvoyant so I believe this is very hereditary.”
Similarly, Jeanette said:
Jeanette: So I think that it’s like embedded in us. In some of
us. You can say, I have a grandma, and then I have an aunt,
and then I have myself. Right, really, it has kind of.. I don't
have any other cousins who have the same abilities like I do,
and none of my aunts had this. So it has kind of been one in
each generation who has gotten it. So I am kind of like this,
it doesn’t bother me.
Jeanette: Så jeg tenker at det ligger litt sånn i oss. I noen av
oss, da. Du kan si, jeg har en mormor, og så har jeg en tante,
og så har jeg meg. Sant, altså, det har liksom.. Jeg har ikke
flere søskenbarn som har det samme som meg, og det var
ingen av de tantene mine som hadde dette. Så det har liksom
vært en i hver generasjon som har fått det. Så jeg er liksom
sånn, det gjør meg ingen ting
Related to the hereditary interpretation is the view that sees these experiences as ordinary, as a part of
daily life. This way of thinking upholds the belief that the experience is common in a family, or in a
particular culture, and that it is not something extraordinary. Linda, who lives in the northern part of
Norway, an area where experiences of the presence of the dead have been part of the culture for
generations136, emphasized that this experience was natural and common, and just as ordinary as going
to the store to buy milk. Her family had had such experiences for generations, and many of her friends
could count back generations of people with the ability to perceive the dead.
Linda: So.. you can say I’m the third generation which we
know of, for I didn't know my great-grandma, who has these
abilities. My daughter has it as well, and my oldest son and
my youngest has it and, but AL she suppresses it. She says,
mommy, I don't have time for it, quite simply... So this is
how we are. And for us it’s a part of everyday life.
Linda Så.. du kan si jeg er da tredje generasjon som vi veit
om, for jeg kjente ikke oldemora mi, som har de her evnene
her. Min datter har det og, og min eldste sønn og min yngste
har det og, men hun AL hun fortrenger det. Hun sier,
mamma, jeg har ikke tid til det, rett og slett… Så sånn har vi
det. Og for oss er det en del av hverdagen.
Thus, as is visible from the analysis above, the different resources used in the sense making of PDP
experiences, do not necessarily exclude each other in the participants’ sense making. The participants
use them in different combinations. Put together, they give answers to the question of why and how
136
For an analysis of extraordinary experiences in a North Norwegian culture, see for instance, Lunestad (2000).
193
this experience can happen. There is some dialogue between the different voices and positions
described above, as for instance Vidar who made clear his position of a psychological interpretation in
discussion over religious interpretations (“I don’t need religion to understand those things”), or
Marianne, who admitted that the coins she found in the bathroom could have had a natural and thus
rational cause, but that she had chosen to believe that they had to do with her brother, who was
therefore still “living.” However, for the large part, the interpretations presented so far in this chapter
existed side by side, and complemented each other.
7.1.6.
“This is still not acceptable to talk about”
Opposing voices in sense making
The voices described above were all interpretations used positively to make sense of the experience.
However, there were some voices which were less evident in the sense making as it was presented by
the participants in the interviews. Those voices were not used as a main positive interpretive resource
in the sense making. They were rather the voices that the participants discussed with. As such, they
were mainly visible through negotiations the participants entered into. Being less visible in the
presented stories of sense making does not mean that they were not visible in the interviews. Nor does
it mean that they were not influential in the lives of the participants. On the contrary, as I will show in
the following, those voices could dominate and bring other voices into silence. Common among those
sense making voices was the discouragement of PDP experiences. PDP can be voiced as being unreal,
unhealthy, representing mental illness, or being wrong or sinful. To make sense of their experience
most of the participants addressed, or made counter-positions to those voices in order to fight the view
of themselves as being mad, stupid or not acceptable in Church. In the following, I present some of
the opposing voices identified through the negotiations of the participants.
Elisabeth worked as a researcher in a hard science milieu. When making sense of her PDP perceptions
she told that she often discussed with some imaginal voices from her work place. She imagined what
her colleagues would say if she told them about her PDP experiences; namely that her experiences
were not real, not scientific and not rational. These imaginal dialogues, however, had not stopped her
from using spiritual and religious resources to understand her PDP experiences. Elisabeth had neither
tried to find a scientific explanation for her PDP experiences, nor had she abandoned her spiritual
interpretation. However, she had appropriated a rational voice that said her PDP experiences were just
mental associations, and she often discussed with that voice.
194
Elizabeth: Every time I have an experience where he is close
to me then ahhhh.. it was just because I associated with this
and this and this. It was just coincidences which came
together. Then I think that no, it wasn't. Because now, in a
way, time after time after time this has been confirmed..
Elisabeth: Hver gang jeg får en opplevelse av at han er nær
meg da ahhhh.. det var bare fordi jeg assosierte til det og det
og det. Det var bare tilfeldighetene som falt sammen. Så
tenker jeg at nei, det var ikke det. For nå har jeg på en måte
gang på gang på gang fått bekreftelser..
In this part of the interview Elisabeth continued her argument by telling stories of her experiences as
signs of presence and sense of presence, and how these experiences were meaningful to her. She also
brought in other people who had had similar experiences of PDP, such as her brother, as backing for
her own subjective experiences.
Elisabeth: So I feel that it’s been people I meet who
acknowledge what I am experiencing. I have not discussed
this in my research meetings at work. But that I, and those
who knew him and who have similar stories… Yes.
Elisabeth: Så jeg føler at jeg får bekreftelse da på det jeg
opplever i alle jeg møter. Jeg har ikke diskutert det på
forskermøtene mine på jobb. Men at jeg, og de som kjente
ham og som har liknende historier… Ja.
In her sense making, her spiritual interpretation “won” the debate regarding what was felt as being true
in relation to her PDP experiences. Yet, the rational voice brought her outspoken voice into silence.
The result was that Elisabeth chose not to tell at work about her experiences.
Elisabeth: For me it’s very private, and I.. certainly because
I have been afraid of what people would say about me and
think about me and certainly because I don't have any good
explanation. And because I work.. it’s certainly based on
that I work in a research environment. Quantitative
methodology is what counts. Controlling variables and..
that's it. Everything else is just foolish. You know what it’s
like.
Elisabeth: For meg er dette veldig privat, og jeg.. sikkert for
det at jeg har vært redd for hva folk skal si om meg og tenke
om meg og sikket fordi jeg ikke har noen god forklaring. Og
fordi jeg jobber.. det er sikkert basert på at jeg jobber i et
forskningsmiljø. Kvantitativ metodikk er det som gjelder.
Kontrollere variabler og.. that’s it. Alt annet er bare tøys.
Det er litt den der da.
Elisabeth pursued her experience in private, and carefully selected her conversation partners. Most of
the participants did the same; they chose with whom they wanted to share their experience. They
reported different reasons for that, as for instance that the listener had to be able to understand and not
be critical, and that the experience was difficult to talk about because words could not always describe
adequately, but also because they were afraid of being looked upon as mad or crazy. “I don’t want any
feedback when I tell such things. I don’t want to hear how mad I am or how crazy this is. Those
people I don’t address” (Jeanette).
In addition to the individual voices of the external self (friends, colleagues and family), the
participants also identified collective voices of groups infiltrated by individual voices, as the
rationalistic voice described above in the case of Elisabeth. Another collective voice present in the
195
material was a voice telling that people with PDP experiences are mad, or should have a diagnosis.
Linda discussed with that kind of voice:
Linda: And it’s what I really don't talk about because I think
it’s uncomfortable.
A: In which way is it uncomfortable, do you think?
Linda: No, like I said to PH then.. we who see things and
experience things, we are seen as crazy. And I don't want to
be perceived as crazy.
Linda: Og det er sånn jeg egentlig ikke snakker om for jeg
synes det er ubehagelig.
A: På hvilken måte er det ubehagelig, tenker du?
Linda: Nei, som jeg sa til PH så .. vi som ser ting og
opplever ting, vi blir sett på som skrullete. Og jeg vil ikke
bli oppfattet som skrullete.
And kids today, there are very many children who have it,
but those kids who have it, they get a diagnosis.
Og barn i dag, det er veldig mange unger som har det, men
de ungene som har det, de får en diagnose.
Instead of making sense of the perceptions in one or more of the ways presented above, this voice
would make sense of the perception as a diagnosis, or as the more vague, “crazy” or “mad”. Many of
the participants were, to differing extents, in dialogue with this “psychiatric” voice. Vigdis, for
instance, was referring to interpretations of PDP as pathological when she took a counter position, by
saying that it was natural for her: “To me it is completely natural, but clearly, for other people it is
crazy.” And she continued to articulate that she did not tell her story to everyone.
A third voice, which some of the participants were in discussion with, was from the church. Linda and
Siri were, for instance, discussing with the voices of some church leaders:
Siri: I have only listened to some people from the Church of
Norway who have spoken in the media and I have thought;
my goodness, what are you guys doing! Really, there’s
nothing dark about it. It isn’t something scary, it isn't weird,
it’s just a part of life, right. Just as death, is not anything
other than life, isn’t it? It’s a part of life and that.. that.. that
is something I want to say to as many people as possible
because it has made out to be either something mystical,
occult, something like that, or to something kind of
sectarian. And so I think that no, I belong to neither the one
nor the other. I’m a completely ordinary person. This is
daily fare. This is not something special. And that.. that I
will gladly say to those who bother to listen to it
Siri: Jeg har bare hørt på noen av disse fra Den norske kirke
som har snakket og jeg har bare tenkt at du slette tid, hva er
det dere holder på med da! Altså, det er ikke no’ mørkemenn
over dette her.. Det er ikke noe skummelt, det er ikke noe
rart, det er bare en del av livet. Akkurat som døden er en del
av livet, ikke sant? Døden, er ikke noe annet enn livet på en
måte. Det er en del av livet og det.. det.. det vil jeg gjerne si
til så mange som mulig for det blir gjort til enten noe sånn
mystisk, okkult, altså noe sånne greier, eller til noe sånn
sekterisk liksom. Og så tenker jeg at nei, jeg tilhører verken
det ene eller det andre. Jeg er et helt alminnelig menneske.
Dette her er hverdagskost. Det er ikke noe spesielt. Og
det..det vil jeg gjerne si til de som gidder å høre på det
Siri felt that church leaders put PDP experiences into boxes, and labelled them as mystic, occult and
very extraordinary, while she believed they were an ordinary and common experience. Siri, who had
not grown up in a Christian milieu, and did not identify as a Christian, was not bothered by the voices
from church leaders. She rather made it clear that she distanced herself from that way of
understanding. For Linda there was more at stake: As Linda identified herself as a Christian and
wanted to be part of the local church, her discussion was more emotional when she argued against the
196
voice of discouragement from the church leaders about contacting the dead, and their labeling of
people who practice such contacts as being against Christian belief and teaching. After a passage in
the interview where she discussed with some voices belonging to researchers who had been present in
the media debate after the statement of Märtha Louise, she turned to the church leaders with the
following emotionally loaded argumentation:
Linda: The second is that the church denied it!!! I was so
disappointed!! Because what is happening here?! The
world's largest love story and then they condemn their own
words! Who was it Moses spoke with in the desert?! Who
was it that opened the grave?! Who was it who displayed
himself for his disciples?! Really, it doesn't say in any place
in this book here – and I have read it a few times – that I can
promise you, and now I feel that I am getting engaged – that
Jesus has reserved the right to show himself!! It's not written
there!
(slams the Bible on the table)
And therefore I become so pissed off! I'm so angry I can hit
something really. For I feel it’s unfair, that which we can't
explain we mock. It was exactly the same thing they did to
Jesus, they mocked him because they didn't understand him.
They do exactly the same with the ability to see. So, the
church mocks itself. It denies itself by saying that Märtha
Louise is engaged in a sham. And that disappoints me. But
they have not disappointed me so much that I have chosen to
leave the state-church yet. But, I feel that I am incredibly
provoked! You see I get engaged, (laughs) the battle-lust is
coming. Because they deny what is written here. If they
claim that Märtha doesn't see, and doesn't have contact with
angels then they are claiming that Jesus never rose from the
dead! Jesus never displayed himself for his disciples. They
deny their own words. And that’s wrong for me. Grandma
said that – and she has read the Bible a few times - that Jesus
is coming again, and that day he comes again there won't be
many who deny him. But he won't come before he gets
everyone to understand that he is actually here.
Linda: Det andre andre er at kirka fornekta det!!! Jeg ble så
skuffa!! For hva er dette her for noe?! Verdens største
kjærlighetsbok og så fordømmer de sine egne ord! Hvem var
det Moses snakket med i ørkenen?! Hvem var det som åpnet
graven?! Hvem var det som viste seg for disiplene?! Altså,
det står ikke noen steder i denne boka her – og jeg har lest
den noen ganger – det kan jeg love deg, og nå kjenner jeg at
jeg blir engasjert - at Jesus har enerett på å vise seg!! Det
står ikke der!
(smeller Bibelen i bordet)
Og derfor blir jeg så himla gæren! Jeg kan slå av bare sinne
altså. For jeg synes det er urettferdig, det vi ikke kan
forklare det kan vi håne. Det var akkurat det samme som de
gjorde med Jesus, de hånte ham for de forstod ham ikke.
Akkurat det samme gjør de med disse evnene med å se.
Altså, kirken håner seg selv. Den fornekter seg selv ved å si
at Märtha Louise driver med humbug. Og det skuffer meg.
Men det har ikke skuffet meg så mye at jeg har valgt å
melde meg ut av statskirka ennå. Men, jeg kjenner at jeg blir
kjempeprovosert! Du ser jeg blir engasjert, (ler) kampgløden
kommer! Jo fordi de fornekter det som står her. Hvis de
påstår at Märtha ikke ser, og ikke har kontakt med englene
så påstår de at Jesus aldri har stått opp fra de døde! Jesus har
aldri vist seg for disiplene. De fornekter jo sine egne ord. Og
det er feil for meg. Mormor sa at - og hun har lest Bibelen
noen ganger - at Jesus kommer igjen, og den dagen han
kommer igjen så er det ikke mange som fornekter ham. Men
han kommer ikke før han har fått alle til å forstå at han er
faktisk her.
What is important in Linda’s story, and which I will come back to in chapter 10, is that the local priest
and deacon supported her by assuring her that her experiences were not something sinful or bad.
Thus, she was not alone in her discussion with the voices of the church leaders arising from the media
debate. In addition to the supporting voices of the local clergy, there were also voices from television
programs (Liza Williams’ show in particular), from books she was reading from the publisher
Energica, which publishes books promoting an alternative spirituality, and from other people in the
local milieu where PDP experiences are common.
Apart from Thomas, who claimed that he was not afraid of sharing his PDP experience, all the
participants pointed out that they chose carefully to whom they would speak. For Thomas it was good
to tell his colleagues and friends about his experiences. He disclosed it on a boys’ trip and received
positive responses. Yet, he was aware that the phenomenon is not generally acceptable in society, and
197
that many people have more trouble with being open about it than he did.
Thomas: Then came a lot of these guys to me afterwards and
said that I think you are tough because you dare to say this. I
believe in this myself but I can't explain it in words. It’s like
there's kind of no connection or doorway to it. But if you
really get close to somebody, you will see that there are
many who have heard about or know about it or know
someone who has done it. But it’s still not acceptable to
speak too loudly about it. Because people are terrified of
being labeled.
Thomas: Da kom mange av dissa gutta til meg etterpå og sa
at jeg synes du er tøff som tør å si dette. Jeg trur på dette her
jeg og men jeg klarer ikke å sette ord på det. Det er liksom
ikke noe connection eller døråpner inn til det liksom. Men
hvis du går inn på klingen til folk, er det mange som har hørt
om eller kjenner på det og kjenner noen som har gjort det.
Men det er fortsatt ikke stuerent å snakke for høyt om det.
For folk er livredd for å bli satt i bås
Thus, one can say that the voices with which the participants in this study discussed were the
rationalistic voices labeling people with extraordinary experiences as stupid or naïve. Then there was
the psychiatric voice, trying to put a more or less specific diagnosis onto those experiences, or else
stating that people with PDP experiences were mad or crazy. Then there were voices from the church,
pointing to those experiences as not being in accordance with Christian—or Lutheran—teachings.
All the participants, however, did have some people to whom they told their stories. Some of them
also presumed that the times were changing and that the attention on extraordinary experiences in the
media was about to help them to become more open about theirs.
Thomas: But I think it’s very fascinating and good to see
that more and more are opening up. That it’s legitimate to
speak about it. That it isn't taboo any longer. That different
newspapers, different medias, debate-programs, films, that
they bring it forward. Precisely because it touches so many
people. All people experience it, and I can understand that
most people have these experiences like I have, but one
doesn't speak out about them because it’s personal and then
one is afraid that others will say: My God, they are after all
dead and buried!
Thomas: Men jeg synes det er veldig fascinerende og godt å
se at flere og flere åpner opp. At det er legitimt å snakke om
det. At det ikke lenger er tabu. At ulike aviser, ulike medier,
debattprogrammer, filmer, at de trekker det fram da. Nettopp
fordi det berører så mange mennesker. Alle mennesker
opplever det, og jeg kan tenke meg at de fleste har sånne
opplevelser som jeg har, men man snakker ikke høyt om det
fordi det er personlig og så er man redd for at andre skal si:
Herregud, de er jo død og begravet!
Although the majority of the participants had some kind of discussion with opposing voices, and
although the opposing voices brought their stories of their PDP experiences into silence in many
situations, none of the participants fully agreed with the opposing voices. They relied on their
subjective experiences and found interpretive resources that could be used to make sense of their PDP
experience.
198
7.1.7.
“Because that lady couldn’t know all that she suddenly told me that she saw”
Mediums as interpretive resources
The collective voices which I have identified so far, both the interpretive resources which are used
positively in sense making, and the voices the participants are discussing with, are voiced through
friends, colleagues and family. They are also mediated through films, TV programs, books,
magazines, Bible texts etc. I have chosen not to go further into these different mediums, although it
would certainly be interesting.
There is however one kind of medium that does need to be analyzed more in detail, namely the psychic
medium. As reflected in the methods chapter, psychic mediums were excluded from the sampling of
participants. I did not interview people working as mediums. I also did not want to focus on
experiences mediated through mediums. It was the “direct” experiences with the deceased that was
my chosen phenomenon for study. However, although I sampled people with such experiences, the
interviews showed that quite a few of the participants (8 out of 16) had visited a medium as well.137
Analyzing the interviews I found that the voices of the mediums played an important role in the
interpretation of the “direct” experiences. I will pursue that specific part of the medium experiences,
their role as interpreting the direct perceptions.
Although most of the participants who had visited a medium expressed some skepticism towards the
mediums, they found—to a large extent—the medium’s message to be meaningful in the end.
Thomas, for instance, used phrases like “it sounds stupid”, and “kind of” which gave an impression of
a distance from the mediums. He also stated clearly that he is critical of mediums saying generally
positive things that soothe bereaved people. “It is like if people are grieving and the medium says that
the dead loves them, this is bla, bla bla, or if they are saying that the dead is doing fine, bla, bla, bla.”
Mediums can easily be a fraud, according to Thomas, by just saying vague and general things which
are pleasant for the bereaved to hear. Most of the other participants also expressed that they were
critical of the mediums, like Torill who stated that “Because I am an utmost skeptic, especially
towards people who are to earn money from it, I am very skeptical here, because there is so much
humbug.”
This way of expressing skepticism could obviously be “window-dressing” in front of me. The
participants did perhaps not want to present themselves as stupid followers of an external, unscientific
voice. But, it could also reflect a process of starting out as skeptical, and becoming convinced after
the medium had brought out very specific things about the deceased, which could not possibly have
137
This is in line with the growing amount of mediumship in Norway which I have described in section 1.2.
199
been known through any rational means. Torill continued her statement on skepticism by saying:
“because that lady couldn’t know all that she suddenly told me that she saw. She just couldn’t. So
then I had to believe it.”
When the mediums conveyed things that were “impossible for them to know”, the participants became
convinced, like Thomas, who was the only one apart from his dead brother, who knew about a certain
fuse box at his work place:
Thomas: (the medium said) “Deep inside there is a fuse box,
in there something is wrong, there’s a plug which is faulty.”
Then it sent chills down my spine because it showed.. it was
something H and I had set up during Christmas and.. it’s a
type of large fuse.. that which turns off and on the lights, I
was going to say. And it’s a fuse box which was damaged,
and it was nobody else in the world which knew it that it
was damaged
Thomas: (mediet sier) «Helt innerst så er det et sikringsskap,
der er det noe gærent, der er det en kontakt som er gæren. ”
Da gikk det kaldt nedover ryggen på meg for det visste.. det
var noe H og jeg hadde fiksa på i jula og.. det er sånn svær
sikrings.. sånn som slår av og på lyset, holdt jeg på å si. Og
det er et sikringsskap som var ødelagt, og det var ingen
andre i verden som visste at det var ødelagt
The specificity of the message convinced Thomas of the medium’s validity, and thus he believed in
the interpretation of the medium when she said that his brother was around them, that he was doing
fine, and was together with their father. Similarly, Elisabeth, Thomas’ sister, who also claimed that
she was skeptical towards mediums, was struck by the specific descriptions. The medium’s
descriptions and messages gave her the proof that her “direct” feelings and perceptions of the presence
of her brother were right. They were not just something she had imagined.
Liv regularly went to see a medium, and in the course of the conversations she brought in her own
“direct” experiences and got them verified. Usually the medium could elaborate on what the dead had
done and said during the last month or so, which corresponded to Liv’s feelings and perceptions and
validated them as indicating that her son was present.
Liv: She (the medium) was here Wednesday a week ago and
I say: “F (the son), we were at L and did you do
something?” And then she says that he is showing her a
terrace with a white wooden fence, and the rest you know,
mama. It was on that terrace we were.
Liv: Hun (mediet) var her onsdag for en uke siden og da sier
jeg sånn: “F (sønnen), vi var på L og gjorde du noe?” Og så
sier hun at nå bare viser han meg en terrasse med hvitt
plankegjerde, og resten vet du, mamma. Det var på den
terrassen vi var.
Thus, the voice of the medium was used to interpret and warrant the participants “direct” experiences.
However, the PDP perceivers would only listen if they became convinced that the medium was not
cheating or being a humbug. The message had to be specific enough in order for them to believe in it,
and it had to make meaning in their situation. If this was the case, the participants believed that the
voice of the medium was the voice of the dead, mediated through the medium.
200
7.1.8.
Summary and reflections
After analyzing the content of the different interpretations, I find that the participants used several
different voices in their sense making of the experience: Relational interpretations, genetic
interpretations, religious and spiritual interpretations, parapsychological interpretations and
psychological (cognitive and emotional) interpretations. As is evident through the quotations, the
participants seldom included only one of these voices in their sense making. Several of the voices
existed side by side, and they could be interwoven with each other. Looking at the dynamics, the
voices also entered into dialogue and discussion with one another. Naturally, the cognitive,
psychological and the spiritual voices debated with each other, and they might be seen as mutually
exclusive. However, in the participants’ stories they could also live side by side. It is, for instance,
possible to believe that the dead exist as souls, combined with a belief that a certain state of mind
causes the experience. The interpretive resources involved further discussions with opposing voices
that I have called “psychiatric”, “rationalistic” and “church-religious”. Although a lot of the
participants referred to earlier times when they came close to believing that they were crazy, they now
fought and discussed with these voices, and ended up believing in their subjective feelings and
experiences. This fight was supported by help from other people, and other collective voices, that
shared their positive view of their PDP experiences. Yet, even if they trusted their experiences, with
the help of others, their outspoken voices were to some extent brought into silence, and as such, the
opposing voices still dominated and influenced some of the actions of the participants in certain
situations.
Similar opposing voices have been identified in other research. Perceivers are found to be reluctant to
disclose their experience for fear of ridicule (Rees, 2001), which suggests an encounter with a
“rational voice.” They are found to be afraid of being thought of as mad (Keen, Murray, & Payne,
2013) which implies a present “psychiatric voice”, and they are also found to negotiate with voices
from the Church (Steffen & Coyle, 2011) in order to legitimize their experiences. In a Norwegian
context, the research of Henriksen and Pabst has identified something of the same pattern.
Experiences of contact with the dead are met with rejection from the Church and from the psychiatric
and medial discourses, an attitude that Henriksen & Pabst (2013: 14) call “repressive orthodoxy”.
Support is also given, however, when it comes to representatives from the protestant church, but it
comes neither from the most conservative, nor from the most liberal branches (Henriksen & Pabst,
2013)
The notion that one may have continuing contact with those who have been close, is an idea in grief
theories, both in the older paradigms and in the newer. What is not reflected, however, is the fact that
201
not all close deceased persons necessarily appear in PDP perceptions. Deceased close persons, for
whom one is grieving, may not show up in PDP perceptions at all. I will come back to this
observation when reflecting on PDP experiences and grief in chapter 8.
7.2. Valuation of significance
In the dynamic process of meaning making, a valuation of the experiences and their significance play a
part. This is reflected in the third research question where I ask for the significance of PDP for the
perceiver. In the following I will analyze how participants evaluated their experience. Was the PDP
experience perceived as positive, or as negative, or as both? What are the positive or negative aspects,
and how can the different evaluations be understood? As a focusing lens, and a conceptual
framework, I use Herman’s concept of valuation which is elaborated in the theory chapter in section
3.1. In Hermans’ notion of valuation there is always an affective connotation. Emotions are
interwoven into the positive and negative evaluations. In the following part of the analysis the
emotional aspect is more to the fore than it was in the previous chapter on sense making and
understanding.
7.2.1. “I don’t know how life would have been if he had not been there”
Positive valuations of PDP experiences
Fifteen out of the 16 participants evaluated the experience as predominantly positive. The positive
valuations were articulated in terms of positive emotional responses. However, the experiences were
also described as producing new positive thoughts and insights, and the positive functions of help and
support.
Positive emotions: calmness, comfort, strength, joy, love
Most of the participants included a statement about positive emotions when they described their
experience of PDP. Jorunn stated that “I know he is here. It is very strong, and very safe, so luckily
this is good.” Ruth said: “I like it. It is very nice”, and later she added that “I become totally calm.”
202
Siri expressed that she felt “peaceful and joyful” and Vigdis proclaimed that “it is a great love.” Linda
described her positive emotions when experiencing her grandfather in the following way:
Linda: He had a consideration and love for the people
around him which was formidable, and I just know it as an
intense warmth and happiness almost as if it bubbles over in
the stomach sometimes. I become quick to laugh, so I
become happy.
Linda: Han hadde en omsorg og kjærlighet for menneskene
rundt seg som var formidabel, og den bare kjenner jeg som
en intens varme og glede omtrent som om det bobler over i
magen noen ganger. Jeg blir lattermild, altså jeg blir glad.
The emotions connected to the positive evaluations were a pleasant feeling or a general feeling that the
experience was good. Further, it was experienced as bringing calmness, confidence and safety. Also,
feelings of strength as well as comfort and solace were linked to the evaluations of the experience.
Finally, some of the participants described the experience as conveying joy and love.
Positive functions: Practical help, personal support and spiritual enrichment
Alongside and often intertwined with the positive feelings of peace and happiness and solace, the PDP
experiences were reported to have some other positive functions in the daily life of the participants.
On the more practical side, some of the participants felt that they received help from the dead.
Gunnar, who often does carpentry in his spare time, felt that his dead father guided and supervised him
when he was stuck. Similarly, Torill told that she received help several times when she was doing her
studies. It could be in finding some books she needed for her work, but also in helping her to think of
the right ideas. Liv received help in uncovering a deficiency in the construction of their house which
needed to be repaired.
Liv: I get a little fun from things. We have after all a newly
renovated house, but last year he says that at the north wall
there and there, is rot in the walls, papa. You have to check.
But I have after all painted it two years ago. And so he takes
a look. He takes a knife and there it was completely black
wet planks under the paint which was formed under the
north wall. It was completely rotten. So it is those things
also. Completely practical things.
Liv: Jeg har litt moro av ting. Vi har jo nyoppusset hus, men
i fjor så sier han at i nordveggen der og der, er det råte i
vegen, pappa. Du må sjekke. Men jeg har jo malt det for to
år siden. Og så tok han en titt. Tok kniv og der var det helt
svart våt plank under malingen som var oppstått under
nordveggen. Der var det full råte. Så det er sånne ting også.
Helt praktiske ting.
In addition to the practical help, the deceased were also perceived to give personal support,
particularly in difficult times. Ruth stated that the shadows she could see were “protecting her, and
watching over her.” Several of the other participants also felt that they were protected by the presence
of their dead family members or friends.
203
Ruth: Because that there comes an unusual shadow of a
person, which looks at me and then it seems like (laughs a
little) yes it is what they do, watch over me. And then I
receive complete peace, I do not feel that I am afraid, but
just that I am puzzled, puzzled over that which watches over
me. And that is in itself comfortable, I like it and I feel a
security in it. Yes.
Ruth: Fordi at det kommer en merkelig skygge av et
menneske, som ser på meg og da virker det som (ler litt) ja
det er jo det de gjør, passer på meg. Og da får jeg helt ro,
jeg føler ikke no’ at jeg er redd, men bare at jeg er forundret,
forundret over det som passer på meg. Og det er i grunnen
behagelig, jeg liker det og jeg føler en trygghet ved det. Ja.
Ruth further stated that she felt her dead husband could see her, and through this she received
recognition for what she was doing and how she lived her life. The mutual relationship in which she
could see her dead husband, and vice versa, was important for Ruth. Although she had children and
grandchildren and good friends at the local center for elderly people, Ruth now lived alone, and spent
many hours alone. In this situation she felt it was particularly good for her to continue in a relationship
with her husband.
Marianne told that the continuing fellowship with her brother made it possible to “keep him updated.”
The PDP experiences made it possible for her to tell her brother about her grades at school, and how
her life was going. Although Marianne did not always get a clear message in return, she felt that her
brother could see her and watched over her.
Marianne: It means.. it means a lot because that eh.. because
it just does, or I don't know. Or I don't know how life would
have been if he wasn't there. It would have been very
strange. If he suddenly just.. How would I keep him updated
then (laughs)? No, it means a lot. It does that. He’s after all
my brother, sort of. It’s like asking an actual person what it
would mean if your brother died, so it’s clear it means a lot.
Yes, so it has sort of become an entirely natural part of my
life. It becomes after all like saying that I can no longer call
my sister.
Marianne: Det betyr..det betyr veldig mye fordi at eh..fordi
at det bare gjør det, eller jeg veit ikke. Eller jeg veit ikke
hvordan livet hadde vært hvis han ikke hadde vært der. Det
hadde vært skikkelig merkelig. Hvis han plutselig bare..
Hvordan skulle jeg holde ham oppdatert da liksom (ler)?
Nei, det betyr masse. Det gjør det. Han er jo broren min,
liksom. Det blir jo som å spørre en vanlig person hva det
betydde om broren din døde liksom, altså, det er klart at det
betyr mye. Ja, så det har liksom blitt en helt naturlig del av
livet mitt. Det blir jo som å si at jeg ikke kan ringe søsteren
min lenger liksom.
For many of the participants the protection or guidance they felt through the PDP experiences were a
continuation of the relationship they had before the death. They could recognize the person’s
characteristics from when they were alive. For instance, Ruth’s husband’s ability to protect her when
he was alive could still be felt after his death. Gunnar’s father’s ability to help with practical matters
of carpentry was still made available, although in a different way. Liv’s son’s role as a spiritual
advisor, and Jeanette’s son’s caregiving character, were also to some extent continued. Jeanette
elaborated on this in the following way:
204
Jeanette: Yes. He must have a confirmation that I have seen
him, that I’m thinking about him and those things.
A: And then you said something that he watches over
Jeanette: Yes. For you notice the confidence he has. He has
always been that person who watches over, as I know. If I
was sick or something, it was him who was around me. And
he couldn't go, so he walked gladly out and came back after
5 minutes. The other one she didn't care. But it turned out it
wasn't like that, she was just scared. But he was always
around me. He was always doing good for others, and.. and
it is after all the same feeling I get back
A: How do you experience it?
Jeanette: It feels good, it really does. And then I
experience…especially when I have gotten confirmation that
he’s with my mother. Because that’s what we said when
mum died after him, that now they are together, now they
are taking care of each other.
Jeanette: Ja. Han må ha en bekreftelse på at jeg har sett ham,
at jeg tenker på ham og sånne ting
A: Og så sa du noe i stad om at han passer på
Jeanette : Ja. For du merker den tryggheten han har. Han har
alltid vært den som passer på, og det samme kjenner jeg.
Hvis jeg var syk og sånne ting, var han den som var rundt
meg. Og han kunne ikke gå, så han gikk gjerne ut og kom
tilbake etter 5 minutter. Hun andre hun brydde seg ikke.
Men det viste seg at det var ikke det, hun var redd da. Mens
han var stadig rundt meg. Han visste ikke det beste han
kunne gjøre da, og.. og det er jo den samme følelsen jeg får
tilbake
A: Hvordan opplever du det?
Jeanette: Det er godt,. Det er det. Og så opplever jeg.. og
særlig når jeg har fått bekreftelse på at han er med mor. For
det var det vi sa da når mor døde etter ham, at nå er de
sammen, nå tar de vare på hverandre.
However, in some cases the deceased not only helped with those things that they used to attend to
while alive. The dead were in some cases experienced as having capacity beyond that known in their
ordinary life. For instance Linda experienced that her dead friend could foresee a possible car
accident, and through a vision asked Linda to warn the person who was about to drive. Both Jeanette
and Eva perceived feelings or voices that told them to slow down on a particular slope when they were
driving. Similarly, Liv told that her dead son once warned his brother about a dangerous situation
while he was windsurfing on the ocean. The warning possibly saved the life of the surfer, according to
Liv.
Liv: He had gotten far away from the teacher and the others,
and the currents started there and the waves can be really
uneven. Then I thought he was going to die because it was
these strong waves and he knew that those waves ... I can't
manage it. But then it was exactly like he was just… he was
in the waves and then he was brought in to shore. So F had
just brought him right in.
Liv: Han var kommet langt bort fra læreren og de andre, og
det begynte å bli strømmer der og bølgene kan bli veldig
ujevne. Da trodde han at han skulle dø for det var noe sånn
kraftige bølger og han visste at de bølgene … jeg greier det
ikke. Men så var det akkurat som han bare ble… han var i
bølgene og så ble han tatt inn på land. Da hadde F bare tatt
ham inn.
In the case of Liv, her son had psychic abilities while he was still alive, and thus some of his character
continued after death, although to a larger degree. While alive he was looked upon as “a master” by
his friends. One of his friends even said after his death: “What shall we do now when our master has
passed away?” Liv uttered that her deceased son continues to be a spiritual guide and protector for her
and for other people since his death.
Although grief and sorrow is still present, the PDP experience helped Liv to believe in a life after
death. The relationship with her dead son was not over, and she thought that they will meet again, and
this made all the difference. Grief was there, but Liv could continue the contact.
205
When the perceiver followed messages or feelings that they believed were coming from the dead, they
avoided something dangerous, or stopped doing something that was not beneficial. However, the
participants did not always follow the advice received from the dead. In the case of Marianne, she
asked her dead brother if she should break up with her boyfriend. She felt her brother said that she
should continue in the relationship, but nevertheless she broke up with her boyfriend. Marianne felt
that her brother had a better overview after death, but still, she did not necessarily follow his advice.
Marianne: but it's not like that I feel that since he’s dead and
maybe sees the world in a different perspective, that he’s
particularly right in a way. I still regard him like a big
brother who comes with advice, and so if they are right or
wrong only time will tell.
A: So he is not a stronger authority for you now than when
he lived?
Marianne: No
Marianne: men det er ikke sånn at jeg føler at siden han er
død og kanskje ser verden i et annet perspektiv da, så har
han nødvendigvis rett på en måte. Jeg ser fortsatt på ham
som storebror som kommer med råd, og så om de er riktige
eller gale vil tiden vise.
A: Så han har ikke noe større autoritet for deg nå enn da han
levde?
Marianne: Nei
Although Marianne stated that she still saw her deceased brother as a teenager, in other passages she
said that her dead brother had changed. He had become more mature and had a calmer appearance.
Thus, the relationship between the living and the dead is not frozen, but continues to evolve. This
evolving may be expressed through seeing the dead as older than when they died, or as younger than
when they died. It may also involve feeling and thinking that the dead have changed, as in Marianne’s
case. However, the relationship and function of the dead to the living also continue from when the
dead person was alive. The continuation and change can be related to the life situation, to the
attachment to the deceased, and to the interpretive resources of the perceivers in complex ways.
Related to the deceased’s expanded capacity was the feeling that he or she was connected to a spiritual
dimension or to a good power. Siri stated that her perceptions of her dead son made her “feel more
connected to a good power, and I consider this as the only meaning of life, to connect to this and fill
my life with this”. She further stated that she felt she was “enriched” through the experiences because
they gave a new dimension to her life. The PDP experience also assured her that she would meet her
dead son again, and this made her less afraid of dying.
Jorunn summarized many of the positive functions in the following quotation:
206
A: What would you say it means for you to have contact
with your father?
Jorunn: It means a lot. To have that safety to know that he
didn't disappear, and I know that he is ok. That means
everything to me…
It made it easier for him to give him away as well. So now I
know that he’s well and I know that there is a time for
everything and that is in a way a security for me as well to
know that he’s well and that he got where he needed to go.
And it is after all a security to know that I also have him
here for my children, that he’s watching over them. So it’s
in a way a natural part of my day. So, to feel the strength
and warmth and know that I’m taken care of an given a
gentle push when it's necessary, I think that’s great!
A: Hva vil du si at det betyr for deg å ha kontakt med faren
din?
Jorunn: Det betyr jo masse. Å ha den tryggheten å vite at
han ikke ble borte, og jeg vet jo at han har det godt. Det
betyr jo vanvittig mye…..
Det gjorde det lettere å kunne gi ham fra seg og. Så nå vet
jeg jo at han har det bra og jeg vet at det er en tid for alt og
da er det på en måte en trygghet for meg også å vite at han
har det godt og at han kom dit han skulle. Og det er jo en
trygghet å vite at jeg har ham her og for ungene mine, at han
passer på dem. Så det er på en måte en naturlig del av min
dag. Så det å kjenne styrken og varmen og vite at jeg blir
passa litt på og dratt litt i øra når det trengs, det synes jeg er
flott, jeg!
The PDP experiences gave Jorunn confidence, and a feeling that she and her children were watched
over and protected. Important also was the assurance that her dead father was fine, which in turn
made it easier to “give him away”. The notion that the dead person is all right was important for most
of the participants, regardless of the type of relationship (parents, siblings, children, friends) and the
type of loss (violent, young, or expected in the elderly).
7.2.2. “It made me fearful… but it gave me confidence”
Some ambivalent valuations
Although the PDC experiences were primarily valuated as being positive, there were some nuances in
the stories.
Siri reported one experience which made her fearful. (in addition to other PDP experiences which she
generally valuated positively). This was the experience which I described in section 6.1.9, where the
table started to shiver when Siri entered the web site for house advertisements at www.finn.no., Her
immediate feeling was fear. The consequence of the experience was, however, valued as positive,
namely to keep her apartment, and not put it up for sale. Siri felt that the PDP experience added to her
confidence in keeping the house. It assured her that this was the right thing to do.
Siri: That I was actually a little afraid of, because that I feel..
it has happened two times, just two times have I been on
Finn.no and looked at the apartment, but it has after all
given me a sense of peace allowing me to stay put. I’m
certain that I have had 20 viewings and I have sat here every
time. And you can say it’s civil disobedience, really.
Siri: Det ble jeg faktisk litt redd av, for det synes jeg.. det
har skjedd to ganger, bare de to gangene jeg har vært inne på
Finn.no og sett på leilighet, men det har jo gitt meg den ro at
jeg sitter. Jeg er sikker på at jeg har hatt 20 visninger og jeg
har sittet her hver gang. Og det kan du si er sivil ulydighet,
altså.
207
For Siri, the immediate experience was experienced as ambivalent. Later it developed into a good
experience.
Two of the participants referred to ambivalence in certain situations. Marianne and Torill told—in
different ways—that there were times that they wanted to be left in peace, and didn’t want the dead to
visit. For Torill this had to do with being exhausted after struggling as a mother of a disabled child,
and the need for some rest. Marianne stated with humor that there are situations when she did not
want her brother to come and watch her, for instance when at a party. However, the situational
inconvenience of certain PDP experiences did not make the valuation negative in general. For
Marianne and Torill, the wish to have some peace from the PDP was the exception rather than the rule.
A: Is there anything about this which you think is difficult?
Marianne: In my daily life, sort of?
A: Yes, scary or difficult or?
Marianne: Just that I think sometimes that (laughs) .. for I
don't have anything against partying and such and drinking
alcohol, it's completely fine for me, but it happens that I
think that damn, I hope R doesn't see this (laughs). But it
isn't something that I go around worrying very much about,
but it’s clear, there are times I really wish that he wouldn't
come. But he usually doesn't pop up then, so we have a
mutual understanding (laughs). But nothing scary or
anything… No.
A: Er det noe med dette her som du synes er vanskelig?
Marianne: I hverdagen liksom?
A: Ja, skremmende eller vanskelig eller?
Marianne: Bare sånn at jeg tenker noen ganger sånn at (ler)
.. for jeg har ikke noe i mot å dra på fest og sånn og drikke
alkohol, det er helt greit for meg, så det hender at jeg tenker
at skitt, håper ikke R ser det her (ler). Men det er ikke noe
sånn jeg går og bekymrer meg veldig for, men det er klart,
det er jo tidspunkter jeg skulle ønsker at han ikke kommer.
Men han pleier jo ikke å dukke opp da, så vi har sikkert en
gjensidig forståelse da (ler). Men ikke noe skremmende eller
noe… Nei.
Among the participants in this study, there were a few who reported ambivalent feelings, and a few
situations where the PDP experiences were unwelcome. There was however, one participant who
valuated the entire PDP experience as negative.
7.2.3. “I didn’t experience it as positive, but as scary”
One negative valuation
The only person in my sample who regarded the PDP experience with family or friends as negative,
was Vidar. Vidar stated clearly: “I didn’t perceive it as positive, but only as frightening”. For Vidar
the immediate feeling was fear. When asking him to elaborate on the fear, he answered, “I don’t have
much to add. It was, quite simply, not a positive feeling in my body.”
I don't have much to add really. It was quite clearly not a
good feeling in my body.
Jeg har ikke så mye å tilføye egentlig. Det var rett og slett
ikke en positiv følelse i kroppen
208
In his narration regarding the meaning making process, Vidar told that he did not find meaning in the
experience. It was not a meaningful or significant experience, and it had no positive function. On the
other hand, he did not comment on any negative outcome from the experience. It was the feeling there
and then that he described as fear. This will be elaborated on in chapters 8 and 9 in relation to the
process of grief and the worldview of Vidar.
7.2.4. “This is not grandmothers and grandfathers and great grandparents, people who watch
over you.”
Valuations of PDP compared to related experiences
Although I asked for PDP experiences with family and friends in the interview, some of the
participants referred to experiences with other dead people as well. Those experiences were often less
positive. There could be people you “perhaps should not have contact with” (Jorunn), who for some
reason were not good for you to meet. Then the experience was usually accompanied by fear.
Jorunn described how she felt she had to avoid a particular house because there were some spirits or
ghosts there, experiences which were frightening to her. However, in line with Jeanette, Eva and
Vigdis, who could also experience unknown people, Jorunn distinguished this experience from PDP
experiences with close family or friends. The latter were good experiences. It was the former
experiences she wanted to avoid.
Jorunn: So I know that he’s here. No, it’s very strong. And
very secure, it is. So it’s after all fortunately good. My kids
have been to one of the oldest set of village houses we have.
And they have been there visiting and were going to take
part in the life of the cottage and see how T lived. And the
one cottage which stands down here is called E cottage. It
comes from E, and some of my forefathers lived there. And
I remember after all that I was there when I went to grade
school myself. And I get a sense that I’m not allowed to go
up to the second floor. I am not allowed to go into that
cottage. Ehh.. I see nothing and at that point I realized
nothing. I just felt that I was not allowed to go up the stairs.
Something or other stopped me. I was not to go there.
Jorunn: Så jeg vet at han er her. Nei, det er veldig sterkt. Og
veldig trygt, er det. Så det er jo heldigvis godt.
Mine barn har vært på et av de eldste bygdetunene vi har.
Og de har vært der på besøk og skulle være med på livet i
stuene og se hvordan T levde. Og den ene stua som står
nedpå her heter E stua. Den kommer ifra E, og der har noen
av mine forfedre bodd. Og jeg husker jo at jeg var der da jeg
gikk på barneskolen selv. Og jeg får en fornemmelse av at
oppe i annen etasje får jeg ikke gå. Jeg får ikke gå inn i den
stua. Ehh.. jeg ser ingen ting og da skjønte jeg det heller
ikke. Jeg bare følte at jeg fikk ikke til å gå opp trappa. Jeg
ble stoppa av et eller annet. Jeg skulle ikke dit
Even though Jorunn knew that some of her ancestors had lived in the little house, she felt that she
should not enter the place. In contrast to the PDP experience of her dead father, which she welcomed,
this kind of experience was not wanted, and she tried to avoid it.
Experiences of the presence of unknown dead people could bring scary and fearful experiences. Eva
told about a perception after a spiritistic séance at a confirmation camp which scared her.
209
According to Eva, in order to be safe, you should not seek contact through spiritistic séances or other
rituals. She compared this to chatting online, and the danger of not knowing who you would
encounter at another end of cyberspace. Dead people are not necessarily people who will make you
good, and if you seek them out you may connect with bad people, was Eva’s claim.
Similarly, Vigdis had a story that she was not able to interpret fully, but she wondered if it was an
entity, an unknown dead person who did not have good intentions. The experience was a very strong
physical feeling of being squeezed, and almost losing her breath. In relation to that experience, and
also as a consequence of what she had learned during her education in spiritual psychology, and
through knowing people with strong psychic abilities, Vigdis reflected on the necessity to protect
oneself if one is an “open person” in order to prevent experiences that will harm you. Vigdis’ way of
protecting herself is now to ask for a signature. She asks the dead to show who he or she is by giving
a visual or auditory statement that is characteristic of him or her. According to Vigdis there are not
only good spirits “out there”, and it is important to protect oneself.
In all the cases, the negative experiences were not related to known and close dead people, and the
participants were able to distinguish between the negative experiences with unknown people, and the
positive PDP experiences with their family-members and friends. Eva put it in this way: “These are
not grandmothers and grandfathers and great-grandparents, people who watch over you. This is
something completely different.”
7.2.5. Summary and reflections
To sum up: In the material, negative valuations are mostly related to slightly different or overlapping
phenomena to PDP, such as haunted houses, spiritistic séances, and precognition. It is when the dead
person is perceived to be unknown, or having bad intentions, that the participants experienced the
presence as fearful. All the participants were, however, able to distinguish these negative experiences
from positive PDP experiences with close family and friends. The latter were positively valuated by
all the participants, except for one. In the case of the negative valuation, there was not a
predominantly positive relationship with the deceased while he was living, which may be one
interpretation. Another interpretation may be related to worldview. I will come back to that in the
following chapters.
The predominantly positive valuations among the participants in this study are in line with previous
quantitative studies on PDP. The proportion of negative experiences, compared to positive, has been
210
analyzed as 6% compared to 69% (Rees, 1971); or 86% as comforting, 8 % as upsetting and 6% as
frightening (Dateson & Marwit, 1997); or 86 % as pleasant, 8 % as unpleasant and 6 % as frightening
(Grimby, 1998). As I presented in chapter 2 in the literature review, some qualitative studies have
given more detail with regard to the quality and structure of such experiences (Steffen & Coyle, 2012:
43). Parker (2005) and Tyson- Rawson (1996) have shown that unwelcome experiences are linked to
unfinished business with the deceased and ambivalent feelings towards the deceased, rather than to
discomfort caused by having an experience of PDP, per se. Others have found that negative reactions
to sense of presence experiences are due to the fear that the experience might not be real, and
frustration when the experience is very brief (Sormanti & August, 1997).
Hayes (2011) concludes by pointing at the relationship with the deceased, and describes, for instance,
how a mother can continue to give voice to negative statements to her daughter after death. Hayes has
more clinical cases in her sample, which could mean that more negative relationships are present,
tapping stories like parents continuing negative statements towards their children. Hayes’ study shows
that it is not only unknown people in the PDP experiences that produce fear, but also known people
with whom you have a negative relationship.
The analysis in this study, although there is only one clearly negative valuation, suggests that a
negative valuation may be linked to the relationship with the deceased, and to a lack of integration
with the perceiver’s worldview.
The positive experiences are expressed with positive emotions around the functions of the dead. The
affective connotations are also found in previous research, and the findings in those studies are not
very different from the findings in the present study. As presented in chapter 2, in previous qualitative
studies the positive function has been described as comforting (Chan et al., 2005; Datson &Marwit,
1997), helping to build new lives (Longman, Lindstrom, & Clark, 1988), helping to make sense of the
death and to resolve the trauma arising from it (Conant, 1996; Tyson- Rawson, 1996), helping in
resolving unfinished business with the deceased (Parker, 2005), giving confirmation that the
relationship with the deceased continues (Steffen & Coyle, 2011), bestowing a sense of being cared
for (Conant, 1996), feeling protected (Klugman, 2006), strengthening the belief in an afterlife
(Sormanti & August, 1997), and strengthening of spiritual and religious beliefs or awakening of such
beliefs (Conant, 2005; Kwlecki, 2011; Parker, 2005; Steffen & Coyle, 2011).
These positive valuations will be considered further when I discuss how the positive valuations relate
to grief symptoms in chapter 8.
The different functions of the deceased, which change according to different situations, point to the
notion that the continuing bonds evolve and change. This is in line with Silverman and Klass (1996)
211
who state that continuing bonds are usually a relationship where the dead is not held as a frozen entity
in the psyche. However, the material shows both continuing and changing characteristics. In some
cases the dead are seen to bestow capacities that are extraordinary; they have a broader overview and
can help the living in certain situations. The relationship and bonds to the deceased are further
considered to connect with a higher meaning, and to give spiritual or religious enrichment. This
finding may be interpreted as spiritual bonds, and thus they are in line with the findings of, for
instance, Klass (1999) Steffen and Coyle (2011), and Rees (2001), who says that PDP experiences can
be characterized as a spiritual phenomenon.
212
7.3. Summary and findings
In chapter 7 I have analyzed the sense making and the significance of the PDP perceptions in general.
The main findings are that:

The PDP experience is mainly experienced as positive.

A number of positive feelings, and just one negative one, were identified in the valuations.
These can be summarized as follows:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

A pleasant good feeling
Calmness
Confidence, safety
Strength
Comfort, solace
Joy
Love
Fear
There are also positive functions connected to the valuations
o
o
o
o
Fellowship (to be seen by, and be together with)
Protection (to be watched over)
Supervision (to receive advice, supervision, practical support and to be protected from
dangerous situations )
Evidence of (good) life after death—which makes the bereaved become:




Less afraid of death
Assured that the deceased friend or relative is alright
Assured that they will meet again
The PDP experience is differentiated from experiences of dead unknown persons, which are
more often negative.

When the PDP experience is evaluated as negative it may have to do with a bad relationship
with the deceased, or with difficulties in assimilating the experience into a worldview.

When making sense of the perceptions, different cultural resources are used, and often in
combination.

Opposing voices, such as “church religious” voices, “rationalistic” voices and “psychiatric”
voices are negotiated in the sense making process. Despite the discouragement conveyed in
those voices, most of the participants relied on their perceptions, supported by other individual
and collective voices.
The mainly positive valuation of the PDP experience is considered further in the discussion chapter. It
will be discussed how this positive significance can be understood as a help and a solace in a process
of grief. Both the positive valuations and the cultural resources will be elaborated further in the
213
chapters on grief and worldview. The opposing voices will be discussed further in Part IV, where I
reflect on the implication of the findings for professional work.
214
Chapter 8: POST DEATH PRESENCE AND
GRIEF.
8.1.
Experiencing PDP through the voices of grief
As reflected in section 7.1.2., among the interpretive resources the participants used in their sense
making were grief and crisis theories. This is in line with findings that grief theories are seen to be
circulating in clinical lore, and are part of everyday conversations and everyday language (Klass
2006).138
In the following section I will go more deeply into what parts or fragments of the grief and crisis
theories the participants employed, and how they were used as an interpretive resource for making
sense of the PDP experiences. In line with the theoretical framework of Dialogical Self Theory, I use
the concept of “voices”. Fragments of grief and crisis theories are seen as “collective voices” that
exist in a culture and precede individual voices (Hermans & Kempen, 1993). They can however be
expressed through individual voices in the external self. In this chapter grief theories will be
particularly in the foreground, but I will also suggest other collective voices that are in dialogue with
the grief theories.
8.1.1.
“It may be due to a delayed grief-reaction”
Grief and crisis as interpreting the PDP experience
The idea that the perception of their dead relatives and friends comes out of, or is caused by, a
particular mental state due to stress, was an interpretation held by some of the participants. It was
however often mixed with, or in dialogue with, the belief that the dead were still living and were
approaching them. I have, in section 7.1, analyzed how Gunnar, who had a vision of his dead mother
and father after the dramatic fire, reflected on his vision as being related to his state of mind—and at
the same time he held the belief that his dead parents were still alive, but in heaven. Gunnar was not
using language specific to grief theories, but he articulated that the first time, after his parents’ death,
was a period of “shock” and “chaos”.
Marianne connected to more specific grief theories as a frame for understanding her PDP perceptions.
She reflected on why the PDP perceptions had happened some years after the death of her brother, and
suggested that it might have to do with “a delayed grief reaction”. The delayed grief reaction, which
138
See also theory chapter 2.2
215
she felt came two years after the death of her brother, coincided with the time of her perceptions of his
presence.
Marianne: When he died like I said I was completely
apathetic, and then all the way up until his coffin was
lowered into the grave, that was the first time I cried after he
died. So then things were just awful again, and so…no, I
can't remember any contact with R in that time. And so
things went generally pretty well and so after two years went
by, then I ran into some new trouble of one kind or another.
It was exactly as if I… a very delayed grief or something...
So it might be right that it was after that I began to receive
more contact with him. Possibly I was a little slow in a very
long grief process or something, because then I started to get
black outs and everything was just foul and I heard a song
all the time which reminded me of him, and it might be right
because it was around the time I was eighteen years old or
so, I think. So it might be right that it was maybe then it
started.
Marianne: Da han døde var jeg som sagt helt apatisk, og så
helt til kista hans ble kjørt ned i grava, da gråt jeg første
gang etter han døde. Så var ting helt fælt igjen, og så…nei,
jeg kan ikke huske noen kontakt med R i den tida der. Og så
gikk ting egentlig ganske greit og så etter to år så gikk jeg på
en sånn ny smell av et eller annet slag. Det var akkurat som
jeg... en veldig forsinket sorg eller noe... Så det kan kanskje
stemme at det var etter det jeg begynte å få mer kontakt med
ham. Mulig jeg var litt treg i en veldig lang sorgprosess eller
sånn, for da begynte jeg å få black outs og alt var bare helt
fælt og jeg hørte en sang hele tiden som minte jeg om ham,
og det kan nok stemme for det var rundt når jeg var atten år
eller sånn tenker jeg. Så det kan nok stemme at det kanskje
var da det begynte.
In line with this view of grief as a framework for understanding her PDP experiences, Marianne added
later in the interview that she had been “shut down” and “closed” in the years after the death. The
“shut down and closed” state was tentatively put forward as having closed the possible contact with
her brother. In other words this (lack of) grief might have been the reason for the absence of PDP
perceptions. When she started to feel that life was really bad, her PDP perceptions began. However,
Marianne also presented an alternative explanation—the presupposition that her brother is living on
“the other side”, which might be to say that the delay did not have to do with her, and her grief
process, but rather with her dead brother. Her deceased brother was seen as the initiative taker in the
PDP experience, and the delay was thus because he had not been able to come before. This statement
was put forward very tentatively, and with some laughter. The laughter may be interpreted as a form
of “window dressing” towards me, or as a way of talking about such matters that she has developed
over time in order to meet the critical voices. Because the more supernatural explanation might
produce ridicule, Marianne disarmed the situation with a laugh.
Marianne: for I was sort of just completely closed off. Shut
down. So maybe it’s possible that he hadn't learned it yet, if
one should think about like that (laughs).
Marianne: for jeg var liksom bare helt stengt. Shut down. Så
kanskje kan det være at han ikke hadde lært seg det ennå,
hvis man skal tenke på det sånn (ler).
In Marianne’s story two voices were in dialogue: One was the psychological belief that she was shut
down, and delayed in her grief process, and therefore the PDP experiences could not happen. The
other voice was the supernatural belief in the dead as the actor and as the motivator of the PDP. One
can only hypothesize whether Marianne gave the one or the other more weight in the interview with
me, as compared with what she does elsewhere.
216
A third way of using fragments of grief theory to interpret the contact was put forward by Berit. Berit
stated that she “cannot let my husband go.” Although people around her, for instance the deacon and a
physiotherapist whom she is seeing, say that she should let him go, Berit does not want to. The
passage below can be interpreted as her dialogue with the “collective voices” of grief, as voiced by her
friends and professional helpers. This dialogue does not need to be connected to her perceptions of
PDP, but it can also be understood in relation to her PDP perceptions as follows: If she lets her dead
husband go emotionally, she will lose the perceptions and the feeling of his presence. Consequently, it
is her grief, in terms of a continuing bond, that keeps him present. If she moves forward in her grief
process and “lets him go”, he will not appear to her as he does at present. And this is what she doesn’t
want.
Berit: I have no wish to lose the contact. I feel that it’s good
actually, and I miss it if it's been a while without it... I don't
know why I can't manage to avoid it. So it’s something
which does it, that I must hear his voice.
Berit: Jeg har ikke noe ønske om å miste kontakten. Jeg
synes det er godt egentlig, og jeg savner det hvis det har gått
for lenge uten… Jeg vet ikke hvorfor jeg ikke klarer å
slippe. Så det er noe som gjør det, at jeg må høre stemmen
hans
Both Marianne and Berit related to the “grief-work-models” as elaborated in chapter 3.2. Marianne
suggested that grief has to do with emotions, and she related to the process of grief: “A delayed grief
reaction” entered the scene when everything felt bad. Berit referred to the goal of grief as “letting go”.
Gunnar spoke about a state of mind which potentially brought about his PDP experiences, and alluded
to trauma theories, or to the attachment grief theories, where an early stage involves searching for the
deceased (see section 3.2.). For all three participants, the voices of the grief theories came later in the
interview, in dialogue with other voices from other positions.
8.1.2.
“This has nothing to do with grief work”
Grief as not explaining PDP perceptions
Eva, on the contrary, stated that her perceptions had nothing to do with grief work. This statement
came as a conclusion to a long discussion after I asked whether her perceptions had been significant in
her grief process. As I will reflect in section 8.2, she answered that her perceptions had not been of
much significance in her grief process. It further came to light that she did not grieve heavily after her
grandparent’s death. So, according to Eva, it could not be the grief that produced the PDP
experiences. Yet, she reflected on what would happen when her parents died and the grief would
probably become heavier. Looking to the future, however, she maintained her position on a separation
between grief and her PDP experiences, saying that “I am not sure if that [grief] will have anything to
217
say to whether I am able to perceive him afterwards or not”. Eva disconnected the PDP perceptions
from grief and grief work, both in the sense that PDP is not significant to her grief process (as I will
elaborate in section 8.2.), but also in terms of her sense making of the experience. Grief does not
explain why the PDP perceptions happen. “It is two separate things”, Eva insisted.
Eva: I don't know what this is actually about. The only thing
I know is that those I sense are here and are taking care of
me. Or like grandpa who I sensed was here for M. So no, I
don't connect it with grief or the process of grieving actually
at all.
Eva: Jeg vet ikke hva dette her egentlig dreier seg om. Det
eneste jeg vet er at de jeg fornemmer er her og passer på
meg. Eller sånn som farfar som jeg fornemmet var her for
M. Så nei, jeg kobler det ikke til sorg og sorgbearbeiding
egentlig i det hele tatt.
For Eva there were other explanations for her PDP, which are connected to her belief in the dead as a
living spirit, and to biographical and relational interpretations of the PDP experiences she has with
some dead people, but not all. She did not know if she will be able to perceive her father after his
death, since PDP is not connected to grief. She also questioned whether a close relationship in life has
any bearing on experiencing contact after death. Eva has the ability to feel unrest in houses, and to see
dead people since she was a child, which may also be one of the reasons why she did not particularly
connect the experience with grief.
Neither Vidar nor Rune, whom I described as attributing a cognitive, psychological framework of
sense making, referred to grief theories as a prerequisite for their PDP experiences. Rune expressed
that he felt more relief than grief when his father died, and Vidar stated that his perception didn’t have
to do with grieving for his father. Neither of them had very good relationships with their fathers, and
neither of them expressed the need to continue with the relationship. So, for some of the participants,
their PDP experience was not connected with grief.
8.1.3.
“Grief is blocking the contact”
Grief as hindering the PDP experience
The grief interpretations also took another turn: In section 6.3.3, I described how, for some of the
participants, the PDP experience had appeared years after the loss. I touched on the idea that some
participants saw this as related to grief. Contrary to Marianne’s belief that her late PDP experiences
had to do with a “delayed grief process”, some of the participants stated that the PDC could only
appear—or would appear clearly—after the grief had calmed down. This idea was suggested in one of
the pilot interviews, and it was raised in three, maybe four, of the interviews in the study unexpectedly
for me. In the interviews two of the participants said it directly, without my bringing it in:
218
Ruth: It is seventeen years since he died and then, in that
state of shock and everything that has happened… It is first
now these later years that there have come all these
thoughts, or feelings, to have such a connection with that on
the other side... and to such degrees and... and very... yes,
very, I like it. It is pleasant.
Ruth: Det er sytten år siden han døde og da, i den
sjokktilstanden og alt det som liksom har vært… Det er først
nå i de senere årene at det er kommet alle disse tankene,
eller følelser, å ha så veldig forbindelse med den på den
andre siden… og til de grader og…og veldig… ja, veldig,
jeg liker det. Det er hyggelig.
.(....).
(…..)
A:... because you say that at that point you didn't have these
experiences?
Ruth: No, I didn't have it because I had such grief
A:.. for du sier at da hadde du ikke disse opplevelsene?
Ruth: Nei, jeg hadde ikke det for jeg hadde så veldig sorg.
It seemed that Ruth thought that grief in some way blocked the possibility of having contact with the
dead: The absence of PDP experiences immediately after the death was due to her heavy grief at that
time, and to the shock she experienced when her husband suddenly died at home, on the floor. Siri
reflected the same thought, and even though she did have vivid perceptions of her dead son quite soon
after he died in an accident, she touched on the idea that PDP perceptions appear weaker when grief is
stronger.
Siri: I also think that grief blocks the contact a little.
Because grief is pretty self-occupied. There isn't much
contact in it.
Siri: Jeg tror jo også at sorgen blokkerer litt for kontakten.
For sorg er ganske selvopptatt. Det er ikke så mye kontakt i
det.
Siri’s understanding of grief is that it is self-centered. Grief makes the bereaved less focused on the
dead, and more focused on herself and her feelings. Jorunn also touched on the same theme, although
not so clearly as Siri and Ruth did, when she said that: “I sensed he was there, but I think I repressed it
a little bit, because one does not speak about such things, and the grief was so strong.” The PDP
experiences were there also in this early phase of grief, but according to Jorunn, in a more “repressed”
form. Perhaps Marianne’s statement also can be seen as in line with this when she said that she was
“shut down” and “closed” right after the death of her brother, and therefore not able to direct her
attention to the dead. Although she didn’t identify this phase of being “shut down” as grief, she
referred to it as a form of not focusing on the dead. This non-focus may block the contact, if we relate
it to the interpretations of some of the other participants.
The notion of grief as being self-centered appeared also in Eva’s account. It seemed as though she
was dividing grief into two parts, with one of the parts being called “I have lost”. The other part
seemed to focus more on the deceased. The “I have lost” part of grief is, according to Eva, the
egotistical part.
219
Eva: And that which really puzzled me when grandpa died –
He’s the first of my grandparents that I lost – it was that that
part of my grief which is called I have lost, that wasn't there.
What which was there, was an enormous thankfulness about
having been allowed to get to know him as an adult. And of
course that he wasn't present any more. But the egotistical
part of the grief wasn't there because I was so ready to let
him go. So, I had let him go before he died. And I had often
been visiting him, we used to have a very good relationship,
many good conversations.
Eva: Og det som forundret meg veldig da farfar døde – som
er den første av mine besteforeldre som jeg mistet- det var at
den delen av sorgen som heter jeg har mistet, den var ikke
der. Det som var der, var en enorm takknemlighet over å ha
fått lov til å bli kjent med ham som voksen. Og selvfølgelig
at han ikke var til stede mer. Men den egoistiske delen av
sorgen var ikke der fordi jeg var så klar for å la han slippe.
Altså, jeg hadde sluppet ham før han døde. Og jeg hadde
vært flink til å gå på besøk, vi hadde hatt veldig god kontakt,
masse gode samtaler.
Eva did not report less clear or blocked PDP experiences due to the “I have lost” kind of grief, as she
had not experienced that form of grief in relation to the people who were the object of her PDP
experiences. As I analyzed in 8.1.2, her PDP experiences were clear, but she did not connect them
with grief.
8.1.4. Summary and reflections
Common to Ruth, Siri, Marianne, Jorunn, Berit, Eva and Gunnar is the use of elements from the grief
work model. As in the grief work model, they understand the goal of grief as “letting go”, and the
process of grief as working through feelings. One interpretation of the suggestion that grief can block
the contact can possibly be related to this grief work model: In the grief work model, grief is seen as
an inner emotional state, with the focus more on the inner emotions of the bereaved than on the dead
(see also section 3.2). When grief is seen as blocking the contact because it is self-centered, it may be
that form of introspective, emotion-focused grief which is being referred to. However, the idea that
grief can block the contact, when put together with the findings referred to in chapter 6, of late and
long lasting experiences of PDP, challenges the attachment grief theories that are based on the notion
that the first phase of grief is a phase of searching for the bereaved, and that this early phase is the only
phase when it is normal to have perceptions of the dead (see theory chapter 3.2). Continuing Bonds
Theory, on the other hand, includes late PDP experiences.
The idea that grief is blocking the contact is an interpretation made by some of the participants. What
this finding suggests is that PDP is not necessarily related to grief as an emotional state. It happens
with people who report that they are not grieving in the emotional sense, and it happens a long time
after the death. It can also appear and become clearer after the initial emotional pressure has calmed
down.
Another interpretation that can possibly be deduced from the claim that grief hinders PDP experiences
is linked to what is analyzed in section 6.3.2; namely that the participants are more likely to have PDP
220
experiences if they are in calm surroundings, with not too much noise. In the light of this
understanding, grief may be seen as “noise”, and thus hindering the contact.
The experience that not all deceased and close persons appear in the PDP perceptions can perhaps also
be considered to detach PDP from grief. That is because not all close persons who are being grieved
will be present in the PDP perceptions. One is then grieving without perceiving the presence of that
person, although one perceives the presence of other deceased close persons. In this section I have
also identified that some people who are not being grieved will be present. Both of these findings
appear to disconnect grief from the PDP experience. This does not mean that PDP experiences cannot
be explained as part of a grief process. They are just not necessarily connected in that way.
None of the participants specifically referred to the Continuing Bonds Theory as an interpretation for
their PDP perceptions. However, the CBT’s interpretation that PDP is a normal form of grieving does
corresponds with most of the material. Yet, the material goes beyond the grief theories when it
indicates that PDP is not necessarily linked to grief.
The finding that PDP can happen for the first time years after the loss, and the statements about grief
blocking the contact, are not found in other research literature, as far as I know. I will discuss this
further in Part III
8.2.
Grieving through PDP experiences
In section 8.1, I described how the collective voices of grief theories are intertwined with other voices
and used as a framework in the sense making of the PDP experience. This theme was introduced into
the interviews without any direct question from me. I did not ask what their view of grief or of the
grief-process possibly meant in relation to their PDP experience. What I asked was what the PDP
experiences meant to their grief process. The following chapter will investigate that last question—a
question which all the participants were asked, and some had an answer to.
When analyzing the answers to my direct question, and including passages from earlier in the
interviews where this topic was introduced on their own initiative, I ended up with four main
categories: the positive significance; the distressing, yet positive significance; the ambivalent
significance; and the not significant experience. None of the participants claimed that their
experiences were clearly negative in relation to their grief process.
221
8.2.1.
“You know what? This makes all the difference”.
PDP as positively significant to the grief process
Most of the participants valuated their experiences not only as positive in general (see section 7.2), but
also as positive in their grief process. Liv expressed it:
A: What has experiencing his presence meant for your
grief?
Liv: You know what? I think that this makes all the
difference. Grief is there, and the loss… of course he is in
my thoughts every day. I speak with him every day. And he
says that he hears me every day. It's not always long
conversations, and I can send him a thought and I speak
with him. But of course it does that... that we know, I’m
after all certain that we’ll meet again. There isn't a black
hole we are going to. There is something after we leave this
planet. And we shall go to a good place. I don't believe in
hell. It is good. And we shall continue to learn and certainly
go through all the errors and all the crazy things we did
when we were down here. I’m sure about that. It’s a
learning process. I think he has a job to do up there. I think
that’s also why he was allowed to come back. There wasn't
anything wrong. He has gotten permission to be allowed to
leave. For he suffered while he was here. And we have F
with us.
A: Hva har dette at du opplever hans nærvær betydd for din
sorg?
Liv: Vet du hva? Jeg syns det at det her gjør hele forskjellen.
Sorgen er der, og savnet.. jeg har ham jo i tankene mine hver
dag. Jeg snakker til ham hver dag. Og han sier at han hører
meg hver dag. Det er ikke alltid lange samtaler, og jeg kan
sende ham en tanke og jeg snakker med ham. Men
selvfølgelig gjør det jo det.. at vi vet, jeg er jo sikker på at vi
treffes igjen. Det er ikke noe sort hull vi går til. Det er noe
etter vi forlater denne jorden. Og vi skal til et godt sted. Jeg
tror ikke på noe helvete. Det er godt. Og vi skal lære videre
og sikkert gå gjennom alle feilene og de gale tingene vi har
gjort når vi har vært her nede. Det er jeg sikker på. Det er en
læringsprosess. Jeg tror han har en oppgave å gjøre der oppe.
Jeg tror det er derfor han også fikk lov til å komme tilbake.
Det var ikke noe galt. Han har fått en tillatelse til å få lov til
å forlate. For han led under å være her. Og vi har F med oss
Although grief and sorrow is still present, the PDP experience helped Liv to believe in a life after
death. The relationship with her dead son was not over, and she thought that they will meet again, and
this made all the difference. Grief was there, but Liv could continue the contact.
This passage shows a link between grief and spirituality or religion. In addition to the idea of a life
after death, there was also another theme present in the passage, namely that Liv believed that there
was meaning to the death of her son, a destiny. This thought helped her to accept his suicide, and as a
voice it dominated the other voice that questioned whether the suicide could have been avoided had
they acted differently as parents. The idea of meaning was related to her son being an especially
spiritual person who, during his short life, felt he belonged more to the other side than to this world.
As a child he had memories from the middle ages, and as he grew older he believed he had lived
earlier lives. As I already have mentioned he was seen among his friends as a strange person, but also
as a “master.” The meaning of his death was that he had work to do on the other side, and this helped
Liv in her grieving process.
Similarly, other participants responded to the question of significance in the grief process by saying
that the PDP perceptions “really makes me good” (Siri and Gunnar), “It helps that he is there”
(Marianne) and “It gives inner peace” (Jeanette). Relating to a heavy grief reaction, Linda answered
that experiencing the presence of her friend “was like a switch turning off” (Linda). Torill said that it
222
helped lift some of the feelings of loss.
A: What do you say that experiencing these presences or
contact with LA has meant for your sorrow?
Torill: (coming quickly) It has been so good because I after
all avoid.. I don't feel that loss.
A: Hva vil du si at opplevelsen av nærvær eller kontakt av
LA har betydd for sorgen din?
Torill: (kommer fort) Å det har vært så godt for jeg slipper
jo.. jeg har ikke det savnet.
Elisabeth reflected concisely on how the PDP experience, which according to her “validated” her
belief in a life after death, made her less sad.
Elisabeth: So if I kind of think that he is dead and gone like I
previously thought, then I get enormously sad and sorry. But
if I think of him as dead and not gone, then I'm no longer
sad.
Elisabeth: Så hvis jeg tenker på en måte at han er død og
borte sånn som jeg trodde før, så blir jeg forferdelig trist og
lei meg. Men hvis jeg tenker på ham som død og ikke borte,
så blir jeg ikke lei meg lenger.
In Elisabeth’s words, her brother was dead, yet not absent. She could continue the relationship,
although not in the same way as when he was living, but still he had not totally gone. This way of
thinking helped her emotionally. It reduced her feelings of sadness. Similarly, Vigdis stated that the
PDP experiences had meant a lot to her grief because they reinforced her belief that the dead are still
living, which as she articulated it meant that “I don’t have to grieve as much.”
The presence of the dead also gives the assurance that the deceased are alright. This further helps the
grief process. It alleviates the pain, and takes away the burden of wondering how they are. As Gunnar
explained it:
A: What would you say this contact has meant for your
grief?
Gunnar: Yes so, that meeting with mom?
A: Mm
Gunnar: It made me calmed in relation to… so the grief was
that I lost them, so abrupt and unexpected and so dramatic as
it was, but, but... exactly what bothered me then about how
it was and how they are doing now, that fell into place
really. Yes, I thought fully and firmly that she was there to
tell me that there wasn't anything more to speculate about
because they were doing well. So it’s really in retrospect... if
I had speculated on it, then it would have just popped up
again. She said after all that it was like that, so (pause) Seen
like this, it has contributed to helping me in my grief.
A: Hva vil du si at denne kontakten har betydd for din sorg?
Gunnar: Ja altså, det møtet med mor?
A: Mm
Gunnar: Det gjorde jo at jeg var veldig beroliget i forhold
til... altså sorgen var jo at jeg mistet dem, så brått og uventa
og så dramatisk som det var, men, men… akkurat det som
plaga meg da med hvordan de hadde hatt det og hvordan de
har det, det falt jo på plass egentlig. Ja, jeg trodde fullt og
fast på at hun var der for å fortelle meg at det ikke var noe
mer å spekulere på for de hadde det bra. Så det er jo egentlig
i ettertid… hvis jeg hadde spekulert på det så hadde det bare
dukka opp igjen. Hun sa jo det at det var sånn, så..(pause)
Sånn sett så har det jo vært med på og hjulpet meg i den
sorgen.
Several of the participants had experienced the sudden deaths of their relatives. This introduced
questions about how the dead are, since they were not able to say farewell, and the dead were known
to have gone through pain in the moment of their death. However, as I analyzed in 6.2.1, the comfort
223
of knowing that their deceased loved ones were OK extended beyond certain types of relationships,
and types of death:
A: Would you say that this contact has meant something for
your grief?
Marianne: Yes so... well.. this grief isn't always really easy
to understand. In the beginning it didn't have much impact
because I was completely apathetic and… there wasn't any
reaction to get out of me at all. But now it’s sort of… So I
miss him probably less than others miss theirs… I mean
those who don't experience this contact in a way. So,
because I do miss him after all, but at the same time I feel
that if I get a good grade at school, then it's not like I would
wish that R was there, because after all he’s like there. Or
then he hears of it the next time he drops in. So it likely
helps for the loss, in a way, I think. And then it’s that I think
he’s ok, and then my grief also diminishes I imagine.
A: Vil du si at denne kontakten har betydd noe for sorgen
din?
Marianne: Ja altså… tja.. den sorgen er ikke helt god å forstå
seg på alltid. I starten hadde det ikke så mye å si for da var
jeg helt apatisk og… det var ikke noe reaksjon å få hos meg
i det hele tatt. Men nå er det liksom… Altså jeg savner ham
nok mindre enn kanskje andre savner sine.. altså sånne som
ikke opplever sånn kontakt da på en måte. Altså, for jeg
savner ham jo, men samtidig så føler jeg at hvis jeg får en
god karakter på skolen da, så er det ikke sånn at jeg tenker at
jeg skulle ønske at R var det, for har er jo der liksom. Eller
så får han det med seg neste gang han er innom. Så det
hjelper nok på savnet, på en måte tenker jeg. Og så er det det
at jeg tenker at han har det bra og da blir også sorgen mindre
innbiller jeg meg.
In summary, one can say that PDP perceptions are experienced as helpful to the grief process because
through the PDP experience the bereaved feels that the deceased is there, and is all right, which makes
it easier to accept the death, and gives hope that they will meet again. The PDP experiences further
highlight a sense of purpose in life, which makes the days of grief easier to bear. The participants also
felt that it was possible to continue the relationship, and to make use of some of the deceased’s
resources. The practical help, the emotional support and the guidance and protection, which were
identified in section 7.2.1, could also be seen to alleviate grief and provide solace. As some aspects of
the relationship between the living and the dead continue, the living person does not miss the dead as
much.
8.2.2. “Even though I am sad, it really makes me good”
PDP as an opening for emotions of grief, yet positively significant for the grief process
Although the PDP is perceived as positive for the grief process, grief symptoms are still there. The
sadness can even be reinforced during some moments when the PDP perceptions happen.
Ruth, Siri and Marianne all said that the presence of the dead could remind them of the death, and
hence brought the grief and sadness to the surface. Marianne explained how the combination—being
sad yet still feeling that the perceptions were positive and helpful—was possible: “It’s like someone is
giving you a hug, which makes you break into tears, but at the same time it helps, because someone is
holding around you.”
224
Marianne: But.. simultaneously I feel that it helps that he is
there, even if the feelings become strengthened there and
then, it is still good in a way. Just like if I feel sad, then
everything gets worse if someone hugs me, or everything
just kind of becomes even more sad, then I just cry even
more, but at the same time then it is a good feeling that
someone is by your side. It is this feeling that I get with him
then. Did I answer the question?
Marianne: Men.. jeg føler samtidig at det hjelper at han er
der, selv om følelsene blir litt forsterket akkurat der og da
så, så er det godt på en måte likevel. Sånn som hvis jeg er
lei meg så blir alt mye verre hvis noen gir meg en klem, eller
da blir alt så forsterka liksom, da bare griner jeg enda mer,
men samtidig så er det en god følelse likevel for noen holder
rundt deg. Det er en sånn følelse jeg får med han da. Svarte
jeg på spørsmålet?
The presence of the dead can raise some sad emotions, but it is still a good feeling, and, according to
most of the participants, it alleviates the grief in the long run.
8.2.3. “It’s pleasant, but we must move on”
PDP as being ambivalent to the grief process
Jeanette mentioned in passing, that she and her daughter had to “move on in life.” This had made her
consider contacting a medium who could help her dead son get over to “the other side.” Jeanette
claimed that the PDP perceptions were not a problem for her, but on the contrary she found them
pleasant. However, her daughter felt it was a bit disturbing. Furthermore, Jeanette believed that the
dead need peace. It was thus right to help her son over to the other side, not for her sake, but for his
sake, and for her daughter’s sake. On the other hand, when asked what that meant for her grief,
Jeanette said it was giving her an inner peace. It also helped her to believe that her dead son was all
right, which in turn made it easier for her to accept his death. Further, it confirmed the bonds with her
son.
A: Does it mean anything – you say that it isn't negative for
you – but does it mean anything positive for you that they
are here?
Jeanette: (thinks) Yes, it has done that, like emotionally...
A: Can you say something more about that?
Jeanette: No, it’s probably due to that we were connected
and such and love each other and.. as long as it is
comfortable. If it had been uncomfortable then it wouldn't
have been good, right? If there had been something [slightly
uncomfortable] between us, which one can hear is the case
for some people, then it wouldn't have been good. But for
their sake, then the time has come closer now. I have taken
this up with my daughter; shall we do it now? We have to
move on as well.
A: In regards to moving on… do you experience that this
prevents you from moving on in life?
Jeanette: I guess it partly does. But I feel it’s more of an
obstacle for my daughter.
A: Betyr det noe – du sier at det ikke er negativt for deg –
men betyr det noe positivt for deg at de er her?
Jeanette: (tenker) Ja, det har jo gjort det, sånn
følelsesmessig…
A: Kan du si litt mer om det?
Jeanette: Nei, det er vel det at vi var knytta og sånn og glad i
hverandre og.. så lenge det er behagelig. Hadde det vært
ubehagelig så hadde det ikke vært bra, sant? Hvis det hadde
vært noe i mellom, som man kan høre mange har, så hadde
det ikke vært bra. Men for deres del, så har tida mer blitt nå.
Jeg har tatt det opp med dattera mi; skal vi gjøre det nå? Vi
må jo gå videre vi og.
A: Det med å gå videre.. opplever du at dette hindrer deg i å
gå videre i livet?
Jeanette: Det gjør vel delvis det. Men jeg føler det mer
hindrer dattera mi.
225
Another ambivalent story was that of Berit who thought she must “let go” of her dead partner (see
8.1.1.). It was not clear to what extent this reflected the voices of her helpers, infiltrating with the
collective voice of older grief theories saying that this is the way forward in the grief process, and to
what extent she was experiencing herself that the PDP perceptions were hindering her from getting on
with life. Berit did not want to let her partner go, and she felt that the PDP experiences were good for
her. Nevertheless, she also told about how her need to be with her deceased partner made her decline
invitations from friends to go out, and she reflected that she had been in “a bubble of grief” for two
years. In other words, it seemed that Berit was ambivalent regarding the PDP’s role in her grief
process, but she had positive feelings about experiencing the PDP.
8.2.4. “It makes no difference”
PDP as not significant in the grief process
Three of the participants claimed that the PDP experiences did not influence their grief. They neither
helped nor hindered the grief process. However the dynamics in their respective reasons were
different:
As I showed in section 8.1, Eva disconnected the experience from grief, and she had not experienced
heavy grief from missing the people she experiences the presence of. However, she claimed that PDP
helped in other difficult moments, for instance with the grief after breaking with a partner. However,
the presence of the dead was not connected to the grieving over that particular dead person, and as
such she did not experience the PDP bringing solace into her grief process.
A: And now again back to that you sense your dead
relatives. What has that meant for your grief?
Eva: Very little, actually.
A: Og nå igjen tilbake til det at du fornemmer dine døde
slektninger. Hva har det betydd for sorgen din?
Eva: Fint lite, egentlig.
Eva explained that she had been “working through the grief before the death”, and therefore did not
grieve in what she called the “egotistical way”, focusing on herself. When her granddad died, who
was the first of her grandparents to pass away, she experienced gratitude for having had the
opportunity to know him in life. The part of grief which focused on the “I have lost” was not there,
according to Eva. Since she had not grieved her granddad in that way, her PDP experiences were of
little significance to her (lack of) grief.
Similarly, Rune claimed that he was not grieving the death of his father. On the contrary, he felt it
was a relief. His father had been sick for a long time, and the relationship, was, according to Rune not
good, however it was better that the relationship his father had with Rune’s brother. So Rune did not
226
feel that his PDP perception of his father meant anything to his grief. On the other hand, the
experience had some, but not much, significance. His immediate reaction to the PDP experience was
positive. For Rune it was nice that he “dropped by”.
A: Yes. What would you say that the experience you had
meant for you?
Rune: (pause) ehh… Meant? Let me think.. not much
actually. Because.. what should I say. It was nice that he
dropped by.
A: Ja. Hva vil du si at den opplevelsen du hadde har betydd
for deg?
Rune: (pause) ehh… Betydd? Skal vi se.. ikke mye egentlig.
Fordi.. hva skal jeg si. Det var hyggelig at han stakk innom.
Vidar also reported that he had a complicated relationship with his father, and added that the grief after
his father’s death also was complicated. He didn’t want to go into more detail about his grief process
in the interview. However, he made it clear that the PDP perception did not have any influence or
make any difference.
A: Has it had any meaning for your grief?
Vidar: Nooo... I don't think so. How? In which way?
A: It makes it easier for some, or it can be a little painful or
upsetting
Vidar: (pause) No, now this whole story and my story were
sufficiently troublesome – without going into it now – that I
don’t think it matters much, because it was difficult anyway
A: Mm.
Vidar: So the answer is no. It’s good that we can answer yes
and no as well.
A: Har det hatt noen betydning for sorgen din?
Vidar: Neeei.. det tror jeg ikke. Hvordan? På hvilen måte?
A: For noen gjør det det lettere, eller det kan være litt sårt og
oppripende
Vidar: (pause) Nei, nå var jo hele liksom den historien og
min historie såpass trøblete – uten å gå inn på det her – at
det tror jeg ikke har noen betydning til eller fra, for det var
krevende uansett
A: Mm.
Vidar: Så svaret er nei. Det er godt vi kan svare ja og nei og.
This statement also followed logically from Vidar’s general feeling that the experience was not
meaningful or significant for him, as I presented in section 7.2.3.
227
8.2.5. Summary and reflections
Most of the participants found the PDP experience helpful in their grief process, although some
reflected on minor ambivalences, and some found that the PDP perceptions were not relevant—either
because they were not grieving the dead person they perceived, or because they didn’t see their grief
and PDP experiences as connected. None of the participants considered the PDP experience as being
only negative for their grief process. The negative evaluation of the experience, which I analyzed in
section 7.2, was related to an immediate feeling of fear, but not to any influence on the grief process.
The distressing, yet positively significant experience is similar to that which Field (2005) describes as
distressing, presumably because they are reminders of the absence of the dead in the current life of the
bereaved. However, in contrast to Field’s assumptions, namely that the bereaved will avoid those
reminders, the participants in this study felt that this confrontation with the presence of the dead was
doing them good.
The positive evaluations of the PDP experience for the grief process can be summarized as follows:
1) Through the PDP experiences the participants felt that the deceased is all right. This assurance
alleviated pain and ponderings around the well-being of the dead family member or friend. In turn, the
assurance made it easier to accept death. 2) For some of the participants, PDP gave an assurance of
life after death. Thinking that they will meet again alleviated the pain of separation. 3) The PDP
experience underscored a sense of purpose in life which helped when times were difficult. 4) Through
the PDP experiences it was possible to continue the relationship with the dead and to make use of
some of the deceased’s abilities to help, supervise and protect. 5) The PDP experiences made the
participants feel that they are seen and recognized by the dead, which gave a positive feeling.
I have already presented the research of N. Field who distinguishes between internalized and
externalized continuing bonds expressions, and who suggests that externalized continuing bonds are
correlated with more complicated grief. As all the participants in this study had externalized
continuing bonds expressions, and most of them, subjectively, found their experiences positive to their
grief process, it will be discussed how this subjective sense of relief from grief corresponds to the
quantitative studies that claim there is an association between (unhealthy) grief symptoms and
externalized PDP. I will discuss this further in Part III.
Field states that the experience of externalized continuing bonds is to a large degree felt to be
distressing, presumably because the expressions remind the bereaved about their sadness at the loss,
and thus worsen their situation (Field & Filanosky, 2010). In my study, some participants felt sadness
as a result of their PDP experiences, but they still found that the experience did not worsen their grief,
but was helpful.
228
8.3.
Summary and findings
In Chapter 8 I have analyzed the understanding of the PDP experience in terms of grief and grief
theories, and how experiences of PDP are considered to influence the grief process. The main findings
can be summarized as follows:

The PDP experience is often connected to grief. In some cases grief theories are used to make
sense of the PDP perceptions. In most cases the PDP experiences help to alleviate grief.

The PDP experience is not necessarily connected to grief. PDP neither has to be considered as
part of a grief reaction, nor is it necessarily seen to influence the grief process. PDP is
experienced by people who are not grieving.

Grief can, in some situations, be seen as hindering the perception of PDP.
The way in which PDP is assumed to help the grief process is often articulated by connecting the PDP
to worldviews. I will elaborate on worldview and PDP experiences in the following section. The
relatedness of worldview and PDP in the grief process will be further discussed in Part III.
229
230
Chapter 9: POST DEATH PRESENCE AND
WORLDVIEW
9.1.
Experiencing PDP through the voices of worldview
In section 7.1, I identified spiritual, religious and secular voices as being present in the participants’
sense making. In the following I will analyze the religious and spiritual sense making further by
identifying the ideas and examining how they are used. As reflected in the introductory chapter, I use
the concept worldview to include non-religious sense making of PDP experiences, as well as the
religious and spiritual sense making.
9.1.1. “The perception of PDP has nothing to do with my religious beliefs, but my
interpretation of it may have”
Worldview, explanations and interpretations of PDP
Eva stated clearly that it was not her religious beliefs that had brought about her PDP perceptions. She
made a distinction between her perceptions and her interpretation of the perceptions.
Eva: No, I think that this doesn't have anything to do with
my beliefs at all. This just is. But my interpretation of it can
very well have something to do with my beliefs. I more
easily accept it, maybe. Yes, I probably believe that. But the
experiences themselves have nothing to do with my beliefs.
They just are. They stand independent. Quite simply.
Eva: Nei, jeg tenker at dette har ikke noe med
trosforestillingene mine å gjøre i det hele tatt. Dette bare er.
Men min tolkning av det, kan nok ha noe med mine
trosforestillinger å gjøre. At jeg lettere aksepterer det
kanskje. Ja, det tror jeg nok. Men selve opplevelsene har
ikke noe med mine trosforestillinger å gjøre. De bare er. De
står selvstendig. Rett og slett
Eva claimed that her perceptions were separate from her worldview. A natural interpretation of this
passage could be that her PDP perceptions were not caused by her worldview or religious belief. This
was the same comment that Eva made about grief. The perceptions could happen without any
particular religious belief. One could, however, also interpret this passage as an expression of two
parts of Eva’s life that she did not connect. Her perceptions or experiences were not seen as religious
experiences. They were not sources of religion and religion was not a source for the perceptions. Yet,
her religious worldview could help her to interpret, and could help her to accept the experiences—as
her worldview could accommodate such experiences.
This way of thinking points to PDP experiences as being independent of worldview in the sense that
231
you don’t have to hold certain religious beliefs or belong to a particular spiritual or religious tradition
in order to experience PDP. In the following, I will analyze how ideas from the worldview are used in
the interpretation and sense making of the participants’ PDP experiences; it is not the question of what
causes PDP experiences that is in under the spotlight. Rather it is the different interpretations
resulting from the participants’ worldviews that I will focus on. Their worldviews are distributed into
bits and pieces, and I will analyze what kinds of elements are being used, and how they help to make
the perceptions understandable for the participants.
9.1.2. “I think there is a higher power in connection with those things”
Voices of religion and spirituality in making sense of PDP experiences
Experiencing PDP made some of the participants feel they were in connection with “a higher power”,
“a divine being”, “a god” or to “something between heaven and earth”. These notions of a higher or
divine being was connected to the PDP perception in different ways, for instance as someone who is
pulling the strings and gives meaning to life through the PDP experiences, but also as someone who
has given to certain people the ability to be sensitive to things that other people don’t see. Less
specifically, the PDP experience opened an understanding of something, or someone, beyond the
ordinary life. The idea of a transcendent reality thus worked together with the experiences of PDP,
and in the eyes of the participants transcended what can be understood by the natural sciences.
Related to the belief in a divine being was the belief in a life after death, or the survival of an immortal
soul. Those ideas played a part in most of the participants’ stories.
“If you are to believe in an immortal soul, it has to exist somewhere”
When I asked in the interview about how they understood their PDP experience, some of the
participants explicitly brought in their belief in an afterlife. Others provided this belief in a more
implicit way. All the participants, except Vidar, and to some degree also Rune, believed that the dead
exist as spirits.
Vigdis spoke of the transition through death as to “pass over to the light.” In Vigdis’ language “the
light” is the spiritual realm, or the spiritual world, which is the place for immortal souls.
232
A: You said “to go over to the light.” What else do you
think about that?
Vigdis: Then I’m thinking about going over into the spiritual
realm or spiritual world.
A: Is that another place than where you're thinking your
father is now?
Vigdis: I think that he’s there. I think that everyone is there.
Because if one is to believe that humans have a soul which
is immortal, then it must exist somewhere.
A: Du sa «det å gå over til lyset.» Hva tenker du mer om
det?
Vigdis: Da tenker jeg å gå over i det åndelige riket eller i
åndeverdenen.
A: Er det et annet sted enn der du tenker at for eksempel din
far er nå?
Vigdis: Jeg tenker at han er der. Jeg tenker at alle er der.
For hvis man skal tro at menneskene har en sjel som er
udødelig, så må den jo være et eller annet sted.
The idea of a life after death was, in Vigdis’ case, connected to alternative spiritual worldviews, as
Vigdis elaborated further in her description of spiritual hierarchies. Vigdis attributed her ideas to
Marina Munk, whose ideas are used in alternative and New Age networks.139 She further connected
her belief in an afterlife with the idea of reincarnation to different hierarchies of spiritual existence.
A: But those who are entities, they aren't there? (over in the
light)
Vigdis: No, they can't manage it, because they linger in the
earthly, or in the physical. It's one thing or another which is
holding them back.
A: Those who are “over in the light”, can they also show
themselves for people here?
Vigdis: Absolutely. Absolutely. But now I have read a lot of
books by a woman called Marina Munk. Have you heard of
her? ...
... But hierarchies, those spiritual hierarchies are after all on
many floors in a way, and one comes first to the astral which
is that level closest to the physical. And then one can
eventually as one develop one’s soul go further up to higher
levels.
A: Men de som er entities, de er ikke der? (over i lyset)
Vigdis: Nei, de klarer ikke det, for de henger igjen i det
jordiske, eller i det fysiske. Det er et eller annet som holder
dem tilbake
A: De som er “over i lyset”, kan de også vise seg for
mennesker her?
Vigdis: Absolutt. Absolutt. Men nå har jeg lest en masse
bøker av en dame som heter Marina Munk. Har du hørt om
henne? ...
... men hierarkiene, de spirituelle hierarkiene er jo i mange
etasjer på en måte, og man kommer først inn i det astrale
som er det nivået som er nærmest det fysiske. Og så kan
man etter hvert som man utvikler sjelen sin gå videre til
høyere nivåer.
The notion of a life after death is connected with different traditions. In addition to a belief in
reincarnation and spiritual hierarchies140 as Vigdis identifies with, a mixture of a Christian belief in
heaven and openness to reincarnation, as presented in the alternative version141, was put forward by,
for instance, both Marianne and Berit. Linda connected with the Christian belief in Jesus’
resurrection, and how he was perceived after his death by his disciples, in arguing for the presence of
the deceased. The notion of life overcoming death, as put forward by Gunnar and Linda, or a more
vague belief that there is “something there” as Jorunn expressed it, together with her attendance at the
local Christian folk church, were also present among the participants in this study.
139
(See for instance http://www.galactic-server.net/KJOLE/Nordic/nytid.html (read Oct 7th 2013)
Spiritual hierarchies can be traced back to theosophy which has influenced the New Age and alternative movement
(Kraft, 2011). See also Hanegraaff, 1998.
141
For the alternative or New Age variant of reincarnation as a progressive spiritual evolution connected to a “weak thisworldly nature, in contrast to the other-worldliness of officially taught Hinduism and Buddhism”, see Hanegraaff, 1998:262275.
140
233
A: Where do you think your father is now?
Jorunn: Well, who knows. Here. (laughs) For I know that he
is here. I don't think that one is done. I think that one still
has a job.
A: Then there’s a question you have touched on before, but
maybe you have something to add: How did you arrive at
this thought?
Jorunn: I guess it’s like… I guess it’s kind of like it is. In my
world. I am not a deeply religious person, but I have after all
a belief in something which is there. And I know after all
that I’m very fond of going to church. I find an inner calm
when I go to church. So this belief that there is something
that gives me strength… And then I believe that those who
are lost who have been close to us, are with us and give us
that strength.
A Hvor tror du faren din er nå?
Jorunn: Ja, si det. Her. (ler) For det vet jeg jo at han er. Jeg
tror ikke at man er ferdig. Jeg tror at man fortsatt har en
oppgave videre.
A: Så er det et spørsmål du har vært inne på, men kanskje du
har noe å tilføye: Hvordan har du kommet fram til denne
tanken?
Jorunn: Det er vel at sånn.. det er vel litt…det er vel litt sånn
det er. I min verden. Jeg er ikke noe dypt religiøst
menneske, men jeg har jo en tro på at det er noe der. Og jeg
kjenner jo det her at jeg er veldig glad i å gå i kirka. Jeg
finner en indre ro når jeg går i kirka. Så denne troen på at
det er noe der som gir meg styrke… Og da tror jeg at de som
da blir borte som har stått oss nær, er med og gir oss den
styrken.
The term “afterlife”, which is often used in the grief literature142, or the articulation of a “life after
death”, refers to a temporal understanding. The participants however, also articulated the same idea in
spatial terms. They called it going over to “the other side”, to “the light”, being in “another
dimension” and at different “levels”. All of these articulations referred to space. Or, as Vigdis stated,
“If you are to believe in an immortal soul, it has to be somewhere.” The spatial terms referred to a
parallel world, and as I analyzed in section 6.3 it was connected to the feeling of the deceased as
present, but not in the same way as a living person, as well as to the participants’ worldviews.
Eva elaborated what she meant by “being in another dimension” in the following statement:
A: Yes. But can you say something about dimensions?
Eva: (exhales) I don't know .. they don't disappear. They
disappear out of our dimension and our world and our
physical existence, but it is after all still an existence which I
can't control, but where they can clearly stretch me a hand
across the border then.. ehh.. I can't explain it in any other
way.
A: Ja. Men kan du si litt om det med dimensjoner?
Eva: (trekker pusten) Jeg vet ikke.. de forsvinner ikke. De
forsvinner ut av vår dimensjon og vår verden og vår fysiske
tilværelse, men det er jo fortsatt en tilstedeværelse som ikke
jeg lenger kan styre, men hvor de tydeligvis kan rekke meg
en hånd over grensen da.. ehh.. jeg kan ikke forklare det på
noen annen måte.
Eva made sense of her PDP perceptions by referring to the dead living in another dimension, with the
ability to cross the border. This way of thinking explains how she can sense and perceive a presence,
but in a way other than with a living person. Thus, the belief derived from her worldview can
incorporate and make sense of her PDP perceptions.
142
See for instance Benore & Park, 2004, and Wortmann & Park, 2008.
234
“Someone’s pulling the strings”
The idea of an omnipotent God who is pulling the strings, is salient in some of the participants’ stories.
Elisabeth and Thomas, who are siblings, shared the belief that there is a power, perhaps a God, who
has the control, and that there was a meaning in the death of their common brother. Thomas said: “I
think there is one or another power in relation to those things who has some kind of superintendence,
or who is pulling the strings from the top”.
This is a way of dealing with a terrible death as meaningful, and understanding their ongoing lives as
part of a plan. It is a way of creating meaning in times of adversity. It is not clear how the
participants link their PDP experiences to this kind of meaning making. The belief in a divine
providence or a purpose is explained as a purpose for the death and a purpose for the life of the
deceased. However, the PDP experience is present in their narratives of meaning making as well.
There may be the interpretation that PDP experiences provides an opening towards the transcendent,
which in turn gives a kind of “proof” that there is more between heaven and earth. Another
interpretation was expressed by Elisabeth and Thomas when they articulated the feeling that the PDP
experiences were directed towards them, and as such they were experiences of being looked upon, not
only by their dead brother, but also by the higher power. As such, it gave them a feeling that there is a
purpose, a plan—also for their own history, despite the violation of positive meaning that happened
through the death of their brother.
Similarly, Torill thought that the birth of her disabled daughter was meant to be. It was predestined
that her soul and the soul of her daughter should meet. Similarly, Liv and Linda reflected on the
purpose and destiny of life.
Linda: Because I came here – and we all agree upon this in
our clique – that we have come here with x number of
meters on our reel, and now that which is used up is used up,
either one saved one’s life one, two, three or ten times – then
the idea is that you shall save your life one, two, three or ten
times. And there are a lot of knots on this reel, and we must
untie the knots on this thread ourselves, and the more knots
we have, and the more we manage to untie, the more we
understand in relation to this power and this attribute which
God has equipped us with. And for me prayer is very
important, even if I don't go to church.
Linda: For jeg kom jo hit - og det er vi enige om alle vi i
venneflokken - at vi er kommet hit med x antall meter på
trådsnella, og når det er oppbrukt så er det oppbrukt, enten
en berga livet en, to, tre eller ti ganger – så er det meningen
at du skal berge livet en, to, tre eller ti ganger. Og, det er
mange knuter på den tråden og det er vi selv som må knyte
opp knutene på den tråden, og jo flere knuter vi har, og jo
mer vi greier å løse, jo mer skjønner vi i forhold til den
kraften og den egenskapen som Gud har utstyrt oss med. Og
for meg er bønn veldig viktig, om jeg ikke går i kirken.
In contrast, for Jeanette and Marianne, the death of their son and brother respectively, caused a breach
in their belief in God. In their view, God could not be pulling the strings in such a way to allow such
terrible things to happen. The death of their loved ones thus made it difficult to believe in God. In
Jeanette and Marianne’s stories there was a gap between a global belief in a good God, and their
235
experience of a lack of meaning in a young and sudden death.
Thus, the idea of a God who is pulling the strings is ambiguous. In the case of Jeanette and Marianne
it implied a negative view of God, which did not helping in their situation of loss. The PDP
experience, however, counterbalanced this belief and introduced a feeling of a more positive view of
God. For Elisabeth, Thomas and Linda it was the opposite: the PDP experience was part of their
belief in a divine providence, and for them this brought solace in times of adversity.
The task of this chapter is to analyze the resources used in the participants’ worldviews. However,
again it must be mentioned that those collective voices are intertwined with individual voices, as for
instance: “I am happy,” “I am strong,” “I am a mother.” In the case of Elisabeth and Thomas, for
instance, it was salient in the interviews that they had a positive way of viewing life. They also both
specifically reflected on that. Elisabeth concisely expressed that she is a “Polyanna-girl”, and that she
has everything in life, except for the too-early death of her brother. Taken together with their belief in
a plan, or a positive meaning for the death, one may speculate that these voices are mutually
influencing each other to produce the belief that things will work out, and that there is a positive
meaning, despite the loss and grief that is experienced.
Elisabeth: Very many have allowed for him to be here, and
that he’s knocking on the door, and here I am, here I am,
here I am. And so like my mother, I and M (big brother) we
have handled this very well, I will say. It goes up and down.
But none of us have given up. And my mother has been
super strong and she feels that he’s with us and that it will
work out. This will be fine, things will work out. We will
manage this and there was a meaning behind it. We actually
think like that. One week after it happened, when we were
right in the middle of it, we could say OK, good thing he
didn't crash on E6 and survived and killed some kids in a car
for example, or that he became an invalid from the neck
down and had to sit.. and that he didn't die when he was 15,
but 35, and we have thought about these kinds of things all
the time.
Elisabeth: Veldig mange har åpnet opp for at han er her, og
at han banker på altså, og her er jeg, her er jeg, her er jeg.
Og sånn som moren min, jeg og M (storebroren) vi har takla
det veldig bra, vil jeg si. Det går jo opp og ned. Men ingen
av oss har lagt oss ned. Og moren min har vært kjempesterk
og hun føler at han er med oss og det ordner seg. Dette her
vil gå bra, ting legger seg til rette. Vi vil klare dette her og
det var en mening med det. Vi tenker faktisk sånn. En uke
etter det skjedde, når vi var midt oppi det, kunne vi si at ok,
godt at han ikke krasja på E6 og overlevde og drepte noen
barn i en bil for eksempel eller at han ble lam i nakken og
måtte sitte.. og at ikke døde når han var 15, men 35, og vi
har hele tiden tenkt sånn ting.
Elisabeth stated that they had handled the death very well. This individual voice was working together
with the voice of purpose and destiny in relation to the accident, which again helped them to cope with
their situation.
“A gift from God”
To understand why some people are able to perceive the dead and have other paranormal experiences,
Linda used the idea of God giving certain abilities to people as a gift. It is God’s power that makes
236
these experiences possible, and she then drew connections with the Bible, and its stories about
extraordinary experiences, and with the gifts of grace given to the first Christian congregation.
Linda: Yes, well. L, whom we spoke of earlier, she sees it
like that. Another friend of mine who also tells me a good
deal of things about things which will happen in the future,
she also interpreted it is a power, that it is a gift of grace we
have. And you can say it’s only in the later years that I have
seen that in contrast with how the Jews cultivated their
religion, I mean, that time when Jesus lived. It was like that.
Linda: Ja, altså. Hun L, hun som vi snakket om i stad, hun
ser det sånn. En annen venninne av meg som og forteller
meg en del ting om ting som skal skje fram i tid, hun tolket
det og sånn at det er en kraft, at det er en nådegave vi har.
Og du kan si at det er først i de senere år at jeg har sett det
opp imot hvordan jødene dyrka sin religion, altså den tida
Jesus levde på. Det var jo sånn.
As we have seen, Linda, who identifies herself as a Christian, has received support from the local
priest and the deacon in her view that her gifts come from God. This makes her relationship with the
voices of the church leaders present in the media easier to live with. Moreover, it gives her confidence
to believe that her abilities are not something evil, or something that she has to get rid of. However, in
the interview she presented an internal dialogue with the voices of the church leaders in order to
convince them that she is right.
Linda: But now this is how I am. I believe that the Church of
Norway has to turn around a little bit, and, and recognize
that… So, neither I or Märtha Louise or any of her angel
school members will become Jesus and perform the same
kind of miracles that he has done. But that some of his
disciples, whom he has given the ability to use our own
abilities, just like him, yes that they must accept. But they
don't! So, I never say that I’m Jesus, I will never say it
because there exists only one. But they must accept that God
has given me abilities, and the Church hasn’t done that, and
that disappoints me. That is, G and P (the priest and the
deacon), amazing! They know that this is just how N is. And
I have been frustrated and distressed so many times, and
asked G for an intercession, and does it work? Yes, it does. If
you don't get an answer right away, you still get an answer.
He is a little slow to answer, I feel. But I’m an impatient soul
then, so the Lord keeps me in suspense now and then.
Linda: Men det er nå sånn jeg er. Jeg tror Den norske kirke
må snu litte granne, og erkjenne at… Altså, verken jeg eller
Märtha Louise eller noen av hennes medlemmer i
engleskolen kommer noen ganger til å bli Jesus og utføre de
miraklene han har gjort. Men at det er noen av hans disipler,
som han har gitt oss evnen til å bruke sine egne evner,
samme som han, ja det må dem akseptere. Men det gjør de
ikke! Altså, jeg sier aldri at jeg er Jesus, jeg kommer aldri til
å si det heller for det finnes bare en. Men de må akseptere at
Gud har gitt meg mine evner, og det gjør ikke kirken, og det
skuffer meg. Det vil si, han G og han P (presten og
diakonen), fantastisk! De vet at sånn er bare N. Og jeg har
vært mange ganger frustrert og fortvilet, og bedt G om å gå i
forbønn, og funker det? Ja, det gjør det. Om du ikke får
svaret med en gang, så får du svar. Han er litt treg til å svare
synes jeg. Nå er jo jeg en utålmodig sjel da, så Vårherre han
holder meg på pinebenken av og til.
In summary, we see that among the participants there were several different ways of using religious
and spiritual resources in making sense of their PDP. The different beliefs and ideas helped the
participants to understand what was happening when they experienced PDP. However, the spiritual
and religious ideas also provided solace and support to the participants. To believe in a life after death
provided not only an explanation as to where the dead were, but it also provided an assurance that the
dead are OK and that they would meet again. Similarly, the idea of an omnipotent God or a divine
providence could give life a purpose, and the idea of extraordinary abilities could give a positive view
of self.
237
9.1.3. “I don’t need religion to understand those phenomena”
Voices of atheism and secularism in sense making of PDP experiences
Interpreting the experience in the light of an “atheistic” or “realistic” worldview, as Vidar and Rune
respectively do, creates another kind of interpretation and dynamic. I have already quoted Vidar who
stated that the connection happens “in his head.”
Vidar: So it can just be a type of reflex, a type of
connection. Something happened with the weather. I
expect it was just there. But the connection happened in my
head.
Vidar: Så det kan jo bare være en sånn refleks, en sånn
kobling. Været skjedde det jo noe med. Det regner jeg med
at bare var der. Men koblingen skjedde jo i mitt hode da.
Vidar’s interpretation was articulated in discussion with a Christian religious sense making voice. He
claimed that it was not necessary for him to have a religious worldview in order to relate to such
phenomena. It was possible to use an immanent psychological hypothesis to interpret his experience,
and thus it was not necessary to relate to a God outside the human being. For Vidar there were
particular parts of religion that he wanted to dissociate himself from, as elaborated in the following
discussion:
Vidar: For me there is a large difference in both
religiousness and debate about different types of power and
such, and in a way structured religious beliefs, of a God
above man and a heaven and hell and… and all kinds of
absurd things which are in religion. Really, in part I find it
completely meaningless in itself (laughs a little), but I don't
need it to, so to speak, have a relationship with these kinds
of phenomena. Then, it isn't a sort of kindergarten notion
about one God and someone by his side and sort of.. for me
it isn't something which belongs to this.
Vidar: For meg er det stor forskjell på både religiøsitet og
debatt om forskjellige typer krefter og ting, og på en måte
ordnede religiøse trosforestillinger da, om en gud utenfor
mennesket og om en himmel og helvete og… og alt slags
absurde ting som ligger i religionen. Altså, dels så finner jeg
det helt meningsløst i seg selv (ler litt), men jeg trenger ikke
det for å så å si ha et forhold til denne typen fenomener.
Altså, det er ikke en sånn barnehageliknende forestilling om
én Gud og noen ved hans side og liksom.. for meg er ikke
det noe som hører til dette.
Vidar stated clearly that PDP experiences do not have to be interpreted in religious terms. One can
use another understanding, or one can just leave the perceptions, without making much effort to find a
proper understanding. According to Vidar, the PDP experience can stand alone without needing any
clear idea of what they are all about.
A: You say that you haven't tried to understand it
afterwards. Can you say any more about that?
Vidar: Hmm yes. After all you can say a whole lot about it.
You can say that I haven't any clear understanding about
what it is and don't a need a very firm idea about it either.
A: Du sier at du ikke har forsøkt å forstå det i etterkant. Kan
du si noe mer om det?
Vidar: Hmm ja. Du kan jo si enormt mye om det. Du kan si
at jeg har ikke noe klar forståelse av hva det er og har ikke
noe behov for å ha en veldig fast ide heller om det.
238
Vidar insisted that his PDP perception was not an important event in his life. There were other
experiences which had been far more important and life changing, as for instance having been close to
death himself after a heart attack. He opposed some of the religious ideas which he thought might be
connected to PDP experiences, for instance the idea of an afterlife, and the notion of a divine
providence. As I have shown in 7.1, Vidar, who identified himself as an atheist, suggested a second
hypothesis, saying that there may be a kind of after-existence in terms of remaining energies or forces,
but not a life after death. He distinguished this after-existence from a religious way of viewing the
existence of a soul or a spirit. He also made it clear that this was not his main hypothesis.
Rune called himself a “realist” and he clarified that he identified himself as neither religious nor
spiritual. However, as I showed in section 7.1.4, Rune presented a belief in an energy that remained
after death. He also believed that his deceased father existed, but he did not have a worldview which
could connect this existence to a specific place. This was, however, not a problem for Rune. For
Rune it was OK to live with a view of something between heaven and earth, which , while
inexplicable now, might possibly be explained in the future by science. According to him, his view of
a remaining energy was not a religious belief.
A: What do you think happened when that woman was
there?
Rune: She helped him go further. I believe that.
A: Where are you thinking… further to..?
Rune: That I don't know, that I don't know. I don't have a
Christian worldview so I don't know. I can't explain it.
A: Hva tror du skjedde når hun damen var der?
Rune: Hun hjalp ham videre. Det tror jeg.
A: Hvor tenker du.. videre til..?
Rune: Det vet jeg ikke, det vet jeg ikke. Jeg har ikke et
kristent livssyn så jeg vet ikke. Det kan ikke jeg forklare.
Rune presented his position as a counter-position to a Christian belief in an afterlife. This might have
been done in relation to me, as an interviewer, as he knew my profession, but not necessarily. The
statement could also reflect his process of coming to terms with a non-religious worldview. He told in
the interview about how he had distanced himself from Christianity while he was a teenager.
However, as Rune had grown up in the northern part of Norway, where PDP experiences and other
extraordinary experiences were regarded as natural and common, he maintained a belief that there is
something left after death. The idea of remaining energy can be seen as a way of connecting his
experience, and other experiences he has heard of, to a rational and scientific hypothesis. The
hypothesis is, however, not specific enough to say where the dead are. Rune disapproved of the belief
in reincarnation and in heaven.
Vidar also strongly opposed the view of a controlling God. He rejected the idea of meaning and
control which he had come across in Christian milieus.
239
Vidar: But, there is something about this sparrow who falls
to earth without God knowing, which is this idea of purpose
or controlling which says that he can intervene. And not
least the very worst thing, namely the idea of heaven and
hell.
Vidar: Men, det er noe om denne spurven som faller til
jorden uten at Gud i alle fall vet, som er denne meningsideen
eller styringsideen som sier at han kan gripe inn. Og ikke
minst det som er det aller, aller verste, nemlig ideen om
himmel og helvete.
He would rather talk about accident and luck than about meaning and destiny—something he regularly
reflected on since he nearly died in a heart attack, and was extremely lucky, given the situation, to
receive help in time. According to Vidar, if there may be some kind of energy remaining after death,
but there is no meaning connected to it, such as an intentional spirit behind it.
9.1.4. Summary and reflections
Some of the religious and non- religious sense making of the PDP experience can be summarized in
the following diagram:
Status of the
Status of the
dead
Living
The PDP experiencer
has been given a gift
from God/ the divine
The PDP experiencer
has extraordinary
abilities
The PDP experiencer
makes mental
connections – which
can be accounted for in
traditional
psychological science
The dead exists as an
immortal soul
The dead exists as
remaining energies
The dead is dead. No
existence after death
In this matrix the first and the last box in both the vertical and the horizontal lines are related to
religion or spirituality and to secularism or atheism, respectively. The categories in the middle can be
interpreted as requiring a more parapsychological understanding. However, this appears in the
material in combination with both the religious and spiritual and with the non-religious interpretations.
240
In addition to the beliefs articulated in the diagram, is the belief in an omnipotent God who holds a
destiny and a purpose for the individual. The belief in a divine providence is ambiguous in that some
of the participants found solace in this idea, and some did not.
The PDP which is perceived beyond ordinary experiences creates for most of the participants an
opening, or a proof, or an experience, that there is a transcendent reality, and thus it works together
with spiritual and religious interpretations. However, for some of the participants it took much
discussion to accommodate their PDP experiences to their worldviews. There are also secular beliefs
that can make sense of the PDP, although the PDP experience is not integrated into a secular or
atheistic worldview as a whole and coherent system. In this study, the use of a worldview was not
found to make a sophisticated whole of coherent beliefs. It was rather used in bits and pieces to
understand enough to live on, and also to provide solace and support for the bereaved in times of
adversity. This is in line with Klass’ findings in his study of bereaved parents, and his understanding
of worldview. “Worldviews are in use and they are affirmed if they have proved useful in hard times”
(Klass, 1999).
I will in now turn to how the participants perceived their worldview to have developed through
experiencing PDP.
9.2.
“World-viewing” through PDP experiences.
In section 2.1, I have described how Dennis Klass (1999) in his study of parents’ continuing bonds
with their children, grouped different “solutions” to the meaning making process after death. His
analysis focuses on whether worldviews “stands the test” in the encounter with death. My analysis
will focus mainly on the question of whether the worldviews can encompass the experiences of PDP,
and how worldviews evolve through a PDP experience. Klass doesn’t explicitly go into what role
externalized PDP experiences play in meaning making after grief. He certainly examines the role of
continuing bonds, but he is not specific about whether there is an externalized continuing bond.
Neither does he make a distinction between meaning making after loss and death (where indeed
continuing bonds plays a part), and the meaning making of continuing bonds expressed as PDP
perceptions. In Klass’ study the meaning making after the loss of a child is in the foreground. In my
study the meaning making after a PDP experience is in the foreground, but the meaning making after
death is naturally intertwined with that. However, as not all participants in my study have PDP
experiences connected to loss, the meaning making of loss and death is not always a present factor.
241
Despite some differences in our perspectives, I have used Klass’ (1999) analytical pattern as a starting
point when looking at worldview through PDP perceptions and experiences. I have however added
some parts and removed others. To recapitulate Klass’ analysis, he constructed 5 categories: 1) Retain
the worldview they held before the death. 2) Interpret symbols and myths in a new and more profound
way. 3) Find new and compelling (parts of) worldview, where the experience of death and continuing
bonds fit. 4) Live with a divided self. 5) Develop an entirely new worldview.
Klass’ category four highlights where there are tensions between worldview and grief experience, or
between continuing bonds expressions and worldview, that occur without accommodation, one to the
other. I did not find this division into separate worlds or a divided self very strong in my material,
although one or two of the cases could be interpreted in this way. I will come back to that in my
analysis. What is salient in my material, however, and which is not categorized by Klass, is that some
draw a distinction and a dynamic between meaning making from loss and meaning making from PDP.
That is: when the worldview changes due to the loss, and then moves “back” towards the original
worldview, due to the PDP experience. I have therefore added this as a category. None of the
participants in this study described their change in beliefs and ideas in such a way that they had moved
to a totally new worldview. Accordingly, I have dropped this fifth category of Klass.
The categories I use are therefore looking like this: 1) retaining worldview, 2) deepening and
confirming worldview, 3) adding aspects from other worldviews and 4) changing worldview and
mowing “back”
I will clarify that the analysis reflects what the participants considered to have happened to their
worldviews through their PDP experience. It is thus not a change in worldview in general that I
intend to explore. However, it is not always easy to identify the point where the reported changes
started. Many of the participants attributed their change in worldview to other happenings in their
lives, although also to their PDP experience, and it was sometimes hard to interpret how and when
these changes did take place. I will thus, when not relying on the participants’ explicit statements
regarding the role of PDP in their “world-viewing”, be tentative in my interpretation.
9.2.1. “I didn’t become religious after that happening either”
Retaining worldview
Under the category of “retaining worldview” one can find different dynamics. First, it includes the
cases where the participant’s worldview can encompass the PDP experience, and therefore does not
need to be changed. This does not mean that the worldview is static. It rather means that the
242
participants report no major change or conversion to another worldview due to their PDP experiences.
Second, there are cases where the worldview is retained, despite the PDP experience, because the PDP
experience is not seen as relevant to the worldview.
Eva could be said to belong to the first group. Her worldview had evolved and it was still evolving
and changing. Yet, she emphasized that this movement was not due to her PDP experiences. Her
worldview had not changed due to her PDP perceptions. It was the same, before and after, according
to Eva.
A: So I understand it like this; when you speak about
worldview and belief and about a spiritual process that you
have been through, is it like your beliefs have been changed
after you experienced seeing the dead?
Eva: No, I think that this has nothing to do with my beliefs
at all. This just is.
A: Så jeg forstår det slik at når du snakker om livssyn og tro
og om en åndelig prosess som du har vært i, er det slik at
dine trosforestillinger har forandret seg etter at du opplevde
å se de døde?
Eva: Nei, jeg tenker at dette har ikke noe med
trosforestillingene mine å gjøre i det hele tatt. Dette bare er.
Vidar also retained his worldview as an atheist. Neither the PDP perception, nor his near death
experience changed his worldview and he claimed: “I didn’t become religious due to this happening
either.” Vidar claimed that his worldview was the same as it was before his PDP experience. This did
not mean that his worldview had not changed. He had grown up with Christian beliefs and practices,
and had disapproved of the Christian and religious worldviews—as I analyzed in 8.1.3. But the PDP
experience did not have any influence on his views. As Vidar’s atheistic worldview does not
incorporate extraordinary experiences, and is contrary to religious interpretation, one could understand
that Vidar is living in a divided world. However, as his PDP experience did not mean much to him,
and he also found secular interpretations that were not directly taken from his worldview, but were
compatible with his worldview, I have found it more appropriate to categorize Vidar’s worldview as
retained.
Thus, there are two dynamics at work here: worldview is not changed due to PDP, because the
worldview can contain the PDP experience as it is, and therefore it is not necessary to change it.
Alternatively, worldview is not changed due to PDP, because PDP is seen as having nothing to do
with worldview. In both cases the worldview can be retained. In the first dynamic, the PDP is easily
accommodated into an already existing worldview. In the second dynamic, a secular or atheistic
worldview is retained and the PDP experience is seen as a mere psychological experience, or as a
phenomenon that science has not yet explained.
243
9.2.2.
“You have to take in other elements”
Adding aspects from other worldviews
Thomas and Elisabeth stated that they had been more open to alternative spiritual beliefs and practices
since the PDP experiences with their common brother. Although, these had not come out of the blue
as their mother was described by both of them as being oriented towards the alternative. Thomas
identified himself as not very much into religion. He hadn’t “prayed for 30 years”, he claimed.
However, he articulated that he had kept his faith from childhood, which included a Christian
upbringing at a local Sunday school. However, now, after the death of his brother, he was more open
to the alternative. Thomas touched on the controversy between the Church and the alternative
movement, but for him there was no necessity to throw out the one in order to follow the other.
Thomas combined a secular orientation together with his Christian faith from childhood, and
alternative ideas.
A: Would you say that your spirituality or call it belief has
changed after that which happened, or after you got in
contact with H?
Thomas: No, I don't think my worldview has changed. I still
believe that it is some kind of Christian childhood faith, that
I still believe in. But I have become more open to the
alternative- that which the church has many problems with, I
was going to say. That there kind of is something much
more than the years we have here on earth. That you must
modernize a little and take in other factors, sort of. That
there is much, much more between heaven and earth than
many of us see.
A: Vil du si at livssyn eller kall det trosforestilling har
forandret seg noe etter det som skjedde, eller etter dere fikk
kontakt med H?
Thomas: Nei, livssynet synes jeg ikke har forandra seg. Jeg
tror fortsatt det er noe sånn kristen barnetro, det tror jeg
fortsatt. Men jeg har blitt mer åpen på det alternative- den
som kirken har veldig problemer med holdt jeg på å si. At
det er noe mye mer enn de åra vi har her på jorda liksom. At
du må modernisere litt og ta inn andre momenter liksom. At
det er mye, mye mer mellom himmel og jord enn det mange
av oss ser
Thomas thought it was necessary to “modernize a bit” and to bring in elements other than the
traditional Christian beliefs and practices. He was now open to practices of healing and mediumship
and believed in the presence of the dead, and the possibility of contact, which he attributed to
alternative ideas. Thus, there was not a change in his worldview, but an incorporation of some new
elements which seemingly could live side by side.
9.2.3. “It has expanded within the same frame”
Deepening and confirming worldview
Most of the participants’ processing of worldview through their PDP experiences can best be
described as a change within the same frame. They said that they did not change to a new worldview
due to the PDP perception, nor did they add elements from other worldviews, but yet their worldview
had changed through their experiences of PDP.
244
Liv stated that her PDP perceptions validated the ideas she already had. She had believed in a life
after death before, but after the PDP experiences she claimed she not only believed it, but she knew it.
Liv: Yes, I went to a class. Through that I became more
aware of healing. That is 20 years ago, and at that time it
was almost witchcraft. But we went to healing if there was
something with our family. So I think I was lead to believe
that there is something else before F died.
A: How was it after F died and after you experienced
contact with him? Has anything changed?
Liv: Now I am.. F and I agreed that there is a life after death.
Therefore I was certain that we were going someplace,
grow, have new challenges. Now it’s like I just know that
there is another place.
Liv: Ja, jeg gikk på et kurs. Gjennom det ble jeg mer obs på
healing. Det er 20 år siden, og på den tiden var det nesten
hekseri. Men vi gikk til healing hvis det var noe med vår
familie. Så jeg tror at jeg ble ledet til å tro at det er noe annet
før F døde.
A: Hvordan var det etter at F døde og etter at du opplevde
kontakt med ham? Har noe forandret seg?
Liv: Nå er jeg.. det var F og jeg enige om at det er et liv etter
døden. Derfor var jeg sikker på at vi skulle et sted, vokse, ta
nye utfordringer. Nå er det sånn at jeg bare vet at det er et
annet sted.
Vigdis claimed that she had been in the same mind-frame since she was sixteen years old, and now she
was seventy five. Her worldview had not been frozen, it had moved, and Vigdis said it had broadened.
The PDP experiences confirmed the worldview she already found herself in.
A: If you look at your spirituality- you said that it is the
same now. Can you say more about that?
Vigdis: It has expanded. It has expanded itself. Within the
same frames in a way, but it has expanded itself. I have lived
in an Indian Ashram, and meditated a lot. And there was
never talk of religion. There was only talk about spirituality,
and that it doesn't have very much to do with religion, but
there are lots who seek the divine through religion, right. It
comes down after all to which culture you are raised in.
Have I answered properly now?
A :Hvis du ser på ditt livssyn- du sa det er det samme nå.
Kan du si mer om det?
Vigdis: Det har utvidet seg. Det har utvidet seg. Innenfor de
samme rammene på en måte, men det har utvidet seg. Jeg
har bodd i en indisk Ashram, og meditert veldig mye. Og
der var det aldri snakk om religion. Det var bare snakk om
spiritualitet, og at det ikke har så veldig mye med religioner
å gjøre, men det er mange som søker det guddommelige
gjennom religionene, ikke sant. Det kommer jo an på
hvilken kultur du er vokst opp i. Har jeg svart ordentlig nå?
For Vigdis her worldview had broadened, but was within the same frame. The basic elements were
the same, but more experiences had been added which confirmed the worldview she had developed as
a teenager.
Similarly, for Elisabeth the PDP experiences confirmed what she already believed. Although like her
brother, she had been open to alternative beliefs and practices, she now articulated her worldview in a
slightly different way. It was not so much about incorporating new elements as about moving her
worldview towards something that was more important in her daily life. This process had started
earlier, when her father died. Now she said that the PDP experiences had confirmed her belief in an
afterlife, and that there was something more between heaven and earth.
245
Elisabeth: So.. I would say that my beliefs have been
confirmed, that there is more between heaven and earth, and
that we live on. It’s difficult to explain and understand,
because we can't set two lines under one answer, but I think
that if one has gotten proof then – I feel after all that actually
I have gotten proof. But if one as a journalist could sit and
interview people who were dead and.. yes, then we
wouldn't… We humans have to be a little afraid to die, have
that instinct in us, because if not then the suicide rates would
skyrocket. We can't know 100%. It has to be a little like that.
Elisabeth: Så.. Jeg vil si at jeg har fått bekreftet den troen jeg
hadde før at det er mer mellom himmel og jord, og at vi
lever videre. Det er vanskelig å forklare og forstå, for vi kan
ikke sette to streker under et svar, men jeg tror at hvis vi har
fått bevis da – jeg føler jo egentlig at jeg har fått bevis. Men
hvis man som journalist kunne sitte og intervjue folk som
var døde og.. ja, så hadde ikke vi vært… Vi mennesker må
være litt redde for å dø, ha instinktet i oss, for hvis ikke så
ville selvmordsraten gått opp i været. Vi kan ikke vite 100%.
Det må være litt sånn.
Siri thought that the PDP experience was moving her already holistic belief from a belief to an
experience. This was also the case before the PDP experiences happened; her belief that everything is
connected to everything had grown through experiences in her life, not least through the relationship
with her son who had psychic abilities and felt he had lived earlier lives.
Siri: Then I am after all enriched by these experiences. I
would rather have N alive in a sense, but I’m after all also
enriched in that I don't believe in these things, but that I
have experienced them. And those are two very different
cases for me, really.
Siri: Da er jo jeg beriket med disse erfaringene. Jeg ville
heller hatt N levende på sett og vis, men jeg er jo også
beriket ved at jeg som sagt ikke tror på disse tingene, men at
jeg har erfart dem. Og det er to veldig forskjellige saker for
meg, altså
Siri: you can say that it’s more, it has become more. Yes, it
has become more, so it’s not like this is something
completely different, it has just become more of something.
It's not like that.. I remember this one guy, a rich guy who
was a friend of the king's. He went to jail and he saw the
world in a completely new way and became much more
reflective and such, understand? But he sounded like as if he
had come to a place which he didn't know existed, but I
don't think I will say it like that.
Siri: du kan si det er mer, det har blitt mer. Ja det har blitt
mer, så det er ikke sånn at dette er noe helt annet, det har
bare blitt mer av noe. Det er ikke sånn.. Jeg husker en sånn
fyr, en rik fyr som var en venn av kongen. Han kom i
fengsel og han så verden på en helt ny måte og ble mye mer
reflektert og sånn, skjønner du? Men han hørtes ut som om
han var kommet inn i et landskap som han ikke ante fantes,
men jeg tror ikke jeg vil si det sånn.
Siri felt that the PDP experiences had been enriching for her. The PDP experiences enriched and
contributed meaning to her worldview and to her life. They gave substance to her worldview through
experiencing it, not only believing it. The worldview was, however, not totally changed, it had rather
broadened, and there was now “more of something”.
Gunnar told about a change and a movement in his worldview. Neither for Gunnar had a totally new
worldview entered the scene, but it was a process which had been going on for many years, in which
the PDP experiences played a part. The PDP perceptions were one of several factors that made
Gunnar confess his Christian faith “more than before.”
246
Gunnar: Because that... a good part of that which happened
and happens afterwards has contributed to why I today
confess more to the Christian faith than I did before.
A: Indeed?
Gunnar: Yes I think so, and not just that, but this is a part of
it, I believe. I would think so. Because in that situation we
were in, then it was actually in a way nice to seek help from
God. But it wasn't until many years later that I was even
stronger in my faith, but..
A: Can you say anything else about it?
Gunnar: Nooo, Not more than that I for example chose to go
to communion. Yes, I believe after all maybe that what we
experienced has contributed to the choices I have taken.
So… in this sense it is good.
A: So does that mean that those experiences of contact or
presence have had significance for your worldview?
Gunnar: Yes, but not necessarily only that really, but that it
has been a part of it, I feel.
A: Can you say anything else about in which way, or what it
has...
Gunnar: No, nothing else than I hope and believe that they
are there they should be, and that which I experience, have
experienced with them has strengthened me in that they are,
and that I will go there as well like them, so that… in that
sense I feel I’m a part of it.
Gunnar: For at... en god del av det som skjedde og skjer i
ettertid har jo vært med på å gjort at i at jeg i dag bekjenner
meg mer som en kristen enn før.
A: Å ja?
Gunnar: Ja det tror jeg, og ikke bare det, men at det er en del
av det, det tror jeg. Det tror jeg nok. For i den situasjonen vi
var, så var det jo egentlig på en måte godt å søke hjelp hos
Gud. Men det var ikke før mange år etterpå at jeg var enda
mer sterk i trua, men..
A: Kan du si noe mer om det?
Gunnar: Neei, ikke mer enn at jeg for eksempel valgte å gå
til nattverd. Det.. ja jeg tror jo kanskje at det som vi
opplevde har vært med og gjort at jeg har tatt de valgene jeg
har gjort. Så… sånn sett så er det jo bra.
A: Er det slik å forstå at de opplevelsene av kontakt eller
nærvær har hatt betydning for ditt livssyn?
Gunnar: Ja, ikke nødvendigvis bare det altså, men at det har
vært en del av det, det føler jeg.
A: Kan du si noe mer om på hvilken måte, eller hva det
har…
Gunnar: Nei, ikke annet enn at jeg håper og tror at de er der
de skal være og at det som jeg opplever, har opplevd med
dem styrker meg i at dem er det, og at det gjør at jeg åker vel
dit jeg og som dem, sånn... sånn sett så føler jeg jo at det er
en del av det.
Gunnar also told about a new practice where he had started to go and receive Holy Communion. The
PDP perceptions, through their indication of an afterlife, had made it easier to confess a Christian
belief, and thus receiving Holy Communion was a natural statement for Gunnar.
Linda, similarly, told that her Christian belief had moved so she had decided to go and receive Holy
Communion in the church. The PDP perceptions had strengthened her faith as they had given
assurance and “proof” to her beliefs.
A: You have after all spoken a lot about this before, but if
you have something to add: Do you experience that your
faith, or your Christian faith has changed after you..
Linda: Yes, yes
A: ..had these experiences?
Linda: Yes. Like I said before. Before I thought. Now I
know. So, I’m strong in my faith. Really I’m not one who
goes around and... When this takes off, you can say. The
only difference I made in my Christian faith is that I actually
went to the alter, for communion. There are certain things
which can't be explained and it's not intended that one
should explain it either, but, but my faith is strengthened.
There’s no doubt about that.
A: Du har jo sagt mye som dette før, men hvis du har noe å
føye til: Opplever du at din tro, eller din kristne tro har
forandret seg noe etter at du ..
Linda: Ja, ja
A: ..fikk disse opplevelsene?
Linda: Ja. Som jeg sa i stad. Før så trodde jeg. Nå vet jeg.
Altså, jeg er styrka i trua. Altså jeg er ikke den som går
rundt og ... Når dette setter inn for fullt da, kan du si. Den
eneste forandring jeg gjorde i min kristne tro er at jeg gikk
faktisk til alters, på nattverd. Det er en del ting som ikke kan
forklares og det er ikke meningen av man skal forklare det
heller, men, men troen min er styrket. Derom hersker det
ingen tvil.
Most of the participants felt that their experiences gave “proof”, “validation”, and “assurance” to their
beliefs. The PDP perception was seen as a way of experiencing beliefs that they already held. In other
words, the PDP experience embodied their beliefs. As such, their worldview had expanded or
247
deepened, it had become “more of the same”, or more “within the same framework.” Gunnar and
Linda also told about a new practice within their worldview, and a move towards a strengthening of
their beliefs.
9.2.4. “It has changed my worldview in both directions”
Moving worldview “back”
Some of the participants changed not towards a new worldview, but back to their old worldview
through their PDP perceptions. To be more precise: the PDP perception moved them back towards
their old worldview. The death of her brother caused a crack in Marianne’s Christian worldview. I
have already analyzed how the idea of a God who is good and has the ultimate control is difficult to
hold in a time of adversity. Marianne said, however, that the PDP experiences had helped on the
difficult way back to a belief in God.
Marianne: So it has actually changed my worldview both in
one way and the other. That he died, caused things to
crumble, and that he comes back can help me find my way
back to God, but I still have problems with understanding
maybe why R had to suffer so badly and such, but then if R
is OK with it, then I should after all just let it go and in a
way. So.. yes..
Marianne: Så det har vel egentlig forandret livssynet mitt
både den ene og den andre veien. At han døde, slo sprekker i
ting, og det at han kommer tilbake kan hjelpe meg å finne
tilbake til Gud, men jeg har fortsatt problemer med å forstå
kanskje hvorfor R måtte lide så fælt og sånn, men altså hvis
R er ok med det, så burde jo jeg være det og på en måte. Så..
ja..
--It changed when he died. So, I didn't understand the logic. If
he had been run over or shot or something, then I could have
blamed human factors, then it would have been much easier.
One gets a strong need to blame something. But that he had
been sick for ten years, then there is nobody to blame,
except a higher power. And he was so Christian and didn't
smoke, didn't drink, he barely took pain relievers because he
felt it was wrong, he was after all completely…I guess he
did everything he could to avoid something like that and
then it happens anyway and then… then I got a little... the
illusion just broke apart in a way. All these dumb clichés
that this is just to test your faith and this and that, it is just…
no… it gets too dumb, I feel, but it is clear that if I didn't
feel any contact with him, or any presence of him then
maybe I wouldn't.. because I want to after all believe in God
and such. Ehh.. I think maybe it would have been more
difficult to find the way back there if I didn't receive any
contact from him, if I hadn’t gotten any sign that he was ok
and that there is something after death. So.
--Det forandret seg da han døde. Altså, jeg skjønte ikke
logikken. Hadde han blitt påkjørt eller skutt eller noe, hadde
jeg kunnet skyldt på en menneskelig faktor, da hadde det
vært mye lettere. Man får jo veldig behov for å skylde på
noen. Men at han skulle være sjuk i ti år, det er ikke noen å
skylde på da, unntatt en høyere makt da. Og han var så
kristen og røyka ikke, drakk ikke, han tok jo knapt
smertestillende fordi han mente det var galt, han var jo helt..
Han gjorde vel alt han skulle gjøre da for å slippe noe sånt
og så skjer det likevel og da.. da ble jeg litt sånn.. illusjonen
slo bare sprekker på en måte. Alle disse dumme klisjeene at
dette er en test for troen din og dill og dall, men det er bare...
nei… det blir for dumt det og, synes jeg, men det er klart det
at hvis jeg ikke hadde følt noe kontakt med ham, eller noe
nærvær av han så hadde jeg kanskje ikke… for jeg vil jo
egentlig tro på Gud og sånn. Ehh.. jeg tror kanskje det ville
vært vanskeligere å finne veien tilbake dit hvis jeg ikke
hadde følt noe kontakt med ham, hvis jeg ikke hadde fått
noe tegn på at han har det bra og at det er noe etter døden og
sånn da. Så.
Marianne’s worldview had been moving back towards a belief in God. The PDP perceptions had
helped her to believe that her brother was having a good time, and that there is life after death. As
such, it brought some sort of comfort into her grief, together with the assurance that there is an
248
afterlife, which in turn made it easier to believe in God. Jorunn dealt with some of the same dynamic,
which is articulated in the following statement:
Jorunn: Yes, I will be as honest enough to say that I thought
that when dad died that there can't be any just God and no
fairness at all with this here. And I was completely certain
that should I get kids, then I would at the very least not
baptize them. I wasn't going to have anything with.. because
it has been so unfair. But then I felt eventually as time
passed – and I was very much at the grave yard visiting my
father's grave after he was gone – and I felt the calm that it
gave me. And I felt that this has nothing to do with
injustice.. it has nothing to do with that. So I have become
more secure in myself, I think. I have felt the calm that it
actually gave. That there is a sense of peace in that. So I had
to re-evaluate. Both of my children are baptized in the
church now (laughs). And I got married in the church. It all
came together. I have found a sense of peace in that which...
So.. yes.
Jorunn: Ja, jeg skal være så ærlig å si at jeg tenkte når far
døde at det kan ikke være noen rettferdig Gud og noe som
helst rettferdighet i dette her. Og jeg var helt sikker på at
skulle jeg få barn, så skulle jeg i hvert fall ikke døpe dem.
Jeg skulle ikke ha noe med.. for det her var så urettferdig.
Men så kjente jeg nok etter hvert som tida gikk - og jeg var
jo veldig mye på kirkegården og besøkte grava til far når
han ble borte – og kjente den roa det gav meg. Og jeg kjente
at dette her har ingen ting med urettferdighet.. det har ingen
ting med det her å gjøre. Så jeg har nok blitt sikrere på meg
selv, tror jeg. Jeg har kjent at den roa det faktisk gav. At det
er en trygghet i det. Så jeg måtte revurdere. Begge barna
mine er døpt i kirka nå (ler). Og jeg gifta meg i kirka. Det
falt på plass. Jeg har nok funnet en trygghet i det som.. Så..
ja.
For Jorunn also, the PDP experiences helped her to reevaluate her image of God. The PDP
perceptions gave her a form of peace, and this peace made her believe that God was perhaps not as
unfair as she had felt after the death of her father.
Thus, the benevolence felt in the PDP experiences was particularly expressed through the assurance
that the dead were doing fine, making belief in God easier.
9.2.5. Summary and reflections
I have in this section analyzed how the participants’ worldviews were retained or changed through
their PDP experiences. As a framework for the analysis I used categories from Dennis Klass which I
modified into a framework more suitable for the present study. I added one category to the model of
Dennis Klass. This is where the participants clearly distinguish between what happened to their
worldview when experiencing the loss, and what happened through the PDP experience. Two of the
participants expressed this clearly. Their story can however also be interpreted as deepening an
already existing worldview. Yet, their description does not use those terms, but rather the language
indicating disapproval of their worldview, and then a moving back—although the “back” was not the
same as before they “left”. Their experience of loss was still there, and it still existed as vulnerability
in their faith, thus giving a new dimension to their “old” worldview.
Using the language of DST: in this dynamic of bringing together parts of a life that has fallen apart,
the PDP experience serves the function of a “third position”, as a voice that reconciles the belief in a
249
good God and the experience of a terrible death. PDP is a positive voice in the midst of suffering
which reminds of a benevolent God.
None of the participants totally changed their worldview, which of course doesn’t mean that this
cannot happen. Two participants became more open to alternative beliefs and experiences, but for
both of them (they are brother and sister), the alternative had already been presented by their mother.
A few of the participants retained their worldview. This did not mean that their worldview was static,
but that the participants were sure that the PDP perceptions had not brought about any changes. Most
of the participants described their worldview as having deepened and been confirmed. In this way, the
PDP perception was significant to their worldview, and this again was connected to positive feelings.
I will, in chapter 10, look further at the relationship between worldview and the process of grief, and at
the dynamic between sense making and the significance of the PDP.
250
9.3.
Summary and findings
I have in chapter 9 analyzed how worldview is used in sense making of the PDP experience, and
how worldviews move and change through the PDP experiences. The main findings can be
summarized as follows:

Ideas and elements from different worldviews, whether religious or spiritual or secular, are
used in sense making to understand how a PDP perception can happen.

Aspects of worldview are also used to provide emotional support and bring solace in times of
adversity. The PDP perceptions are in those cases seen as part of a spiritual or religious
worldview.

Through the PDP experiences, people’s worldviews are retained, deepened or changed. Most
of the participants report that their worldview is deepened and confirmed through their PDP
experience.
The analysis of the PDP experience and worldview has shown that worldviews, or aspects of
worldviews, are not only used in order to cognitively understand how a peculiar experience can
happen. They are also used to provide solace in times of adversity. Moreover, the understanding does
not need to create a coherent whole, but elements from the worldview can make enough sense to live
on.
The stories of the participants have shown that the PDP experience neither has to be interpreted as a
grief reaction, nor as a spiritual experience. However, for most of the participants, there was a close
link between grief, worldview and PDP experiences. I will elaborate on this in the next chapter.
251
252
Chapter 10: PDP EXPERIENCES, GRIEF AND
WORLDVIEW - DYNAMICS OF MEANING MAKING
10.1 PDP experiences- dynamics of meaning making
The structure of the analysis chapters so far has approached grief and worldview, sense making and
significance separately. In this chapter I will look at the dynamics between those elements, and also
point to where they may be intertwined and blended. I will thus focus on parts of the interviews which
showed nexuses where all the elements were present.
I will start with a quote from Siri where sense making and the significance of the PDP experiences are
connected. Siri was answering the question about what PDP means for her, in other words the
significance of the experience.
Siri: But you are after all also concerned with what does
this, right? And it does – even if I am sad – it does me a lot
of good. So, it doesn't really sound like that, but
A: Are you talking about those two experiences?
Siri: Yes, that he is ok. That he is ok. There is nothing
which… Well, there are two things which make me well.
The one is that I believe actually… well of course, I think he
is dead. By all means, I put his ashes in the soil. So, I’m not
completely crazy, to put it like that, but I have after all
gotten a completely new dimension in life, in that this is not
an ending, so everything hangs together. I’m pretty engaged
with Buddhism, not because I’m some kind of scholar in this
in any kind of way, but I have after all pick up a bit here and
there, that everything hangs together with everything, it
works really well for me, and it matches up with my
worldview, that is, one isn't better than the other, right, and
then I must after all say that – I don't mean that which I'm
saying now, but I' will say it anyway: Then I after all
enriched by these experiences. I would rather have N alive,
but I’m also enriched in that I, as I've said before, I don't
believe in these things, but that I have experienced them.
And those are two very different cases for me, really.
Siri: Men du er jo opptatt av også hva gjør dette, ikke sant?
Og det gjør – selv om jeg er lei meg – så gjør det meg veldig
godt. Altså, det høres ikke akkurat sånn ut nå, men
A: Snakker du nå om de to erfaringene?
Siri: Ja, at han har det bra. At han har det bra. Det er ingen
ting som… Altså, det er to ting som gjør meg godt. Det ene
er at jeg tror faktisk.. altså selvfølgelig, jeg tror at han er
død. For all del, jeg har puttet ham i jorden som aske. Altså,
jeg er ikke skrullete for å si det sånn, men jeg har jo fått en
helt ny dimensjon i livet, ved at dette er jo ikke en slutt, altså
alt henger sammen. Jeg er ganske opptatt av buddhisme,
ikke for at jeg er noe lærd i dette på noen som helst måte,
men jeg har jo snappet opp litt her og der, at dette med alt
henger sammen med alt, det passer meg enormt godt, og det
stemmer sånn sett med mine erfaringer også, og det stemmer
med mitt livssyn, altså dette ikke en bedre enn en annen,
ikke sant, og da må jeg jo si at – jeg mener ikke det jeg sier
nå, men jeg sier det likevel: Da er jo jeg beriket med disse
erfaringene. Jeg ville heller hatt N levende, men jeg er jo
også beriket ved at jeg som sagt ikke tror på disse tingene,
men at jeg har erfart dem. Og det er to veldig forskjellige
saker for meg, altså.
In answering the question about significance, the sense making also played a role. Siri stated that
there were two things that she had benefitted from through experiencing PDP. The first was that the
PDP experiences “proved” that her dead son was fine. Earlier in the interview Siri had explained that
her son, in a PDP experience, had told her that he now could do twice as much of all the high powered
things he loved to do while alive, and that he was having a great time at the place where he was. The
second benefit was that it had given her a new dimension in life, as it had enriched her spiritual life.
253
The PDP experiences further confirmed her worldview (that everything is connected to everything,
with a belief in reincarnation) which in turn reinforced her interpretative resources for an
understanding or sense making of the PDP experience. To put it another way: The two benefits, or
positive outcomes of the PDP experiences (their significance), were also used in building and
grounding her worldview, and as such they contributed to an understanding of the PDP experience
(sense making).
One could also find that worldview and grief were related in Siri’s story. The PDP experience in
which she could feel that her dead son was all right, helped her to adapt to her loss. Her spiritual
growth and the conviction that her son was OK gave solace in her grief. Siri told that she still has
grief symptoms, she feels sad, and has problems with concentration, sometimes she feels scared, and
she was sometimes to crying through her interview. However, the personal and spiritual growth
experienced through the PDP experiences had given her strength and helped her through difficult
times. Thus, her worldview (where PDP plays a part) helps in her grief-process, and the grief she
experiences (where PDP plays a part) also enriches her spiritual life.
Elisabeth stated that the PDP experiences were beneficial and positively significant to her coping with
grief because they proved that there is a meaning and purpose to the life and death of her brother. This
gave solace in her grief, and helped her to cope.
Elisabeth: I see that it has helped me. That there is a way to
continue living. To manage it. To understand and find a
meaning in it. Trust. Because it… when there is a person
who has been unconditionally fond of you the entire time
(cries) and you haven't been afraid to fall because he would
have stood there, when he is gone you become a little… But
then I see that there are also other people who come and
stand in those places eventually, but that he is there in a
different way. So… I think that it has absolutely helped me.
And I think that essentially all people should know about it,
that there isn’t anything to be afraid of. And that things are,
we are all in one, we are a part of the universe. But I haven't
read much. There is a lot of literature about this, but I
haven't had a need for it.
Elisabeth: Jeg ser at det har hjulpet meg. At det er en måte å
leve videre på. Håndtere det på. Forstå og finne en mening i
det. Trøst. For det… når det er en person som har vært
ubetinget glad i deg hele tiden (gråter) og du ikke har vært
redd for å falle for han ville stått der, når han er borte da blir
du litt sånn.. Men så ser jeg at det også er andre personer
som kommer og stiller seg på de plassene eventuelt, men at
han er med på en annen måte. Så.. jeg tenker at det har
absolutt hjulpet meg. Og jeg tenker at egentlig burde alle
mennesker vite det, at det ikke er noe å være redd for. Og at
ting er, vi er i ett alt sammen, vi er en del av universet. Men
jeg har ikke lest noe særlig. Det er masse litteratur på dette
her, men jeg har ikke hatt behov for det.
To be able to make sense of the PDP experience in terms of a worldview—although not in terms of a
whole system of coherent beliefs—affected the significance of the experience in the grief process for
Elisabeth. Worldview, grief alleviation and sense making worked together, and reinforced one
another, with the result that Elisabeth felt less sad.
254
Elisabeth: When I kind of take it in that he is actually not
here, he is dead, then I think that when I grieve for him then
I’m actually grieving for him through the definition of death
I had before, if you understand me correctly. I believed
maybe in reincarnation, but they were in a way gone. So if I
kind of think that he is dead and gone like I previously
thought, then I get enormously sad and sorry. But if I think
of him as dead and not gone, then I'm no longer sad. I feel
always sort of…But that comes over me sometimes and I
must just process it then.
Elisabeth: Når jeg på en måte tar det litt innover meg igjen
at han er faktisk ikke her, han er død, så tenker jeg at når jeg
sørger for han så sørger jeg ut fra den definisjonen av død
som jeg hadde før, hvis du forstår meg rett. Jeg trodde
kanskje på reinkarnasjon, men de var på en måte borte. Så
hvis jeg tenker på en måte at han er død og borte sånn som
jeg trodde før, og så blir jeg forferdelig trist og lei meg. Men
hvis jeg tenker på ham som død og ikke borte, så blir jeg
ikke lei meg lenger. Jeg føler alltid likesom… Men det
kommer innover meg av og til og jeg må bearbeide det da.
In the case of Siri and Elisabeth, as well as with other participants, the voices of sense making and the
voices of the significance of the PDP experience, both in terms of grief and worldview, reinforced
each other and moved in the same direction. In other cases, the voices were contrary, and the
dynamics thus became different. For instance, in Jeanette’s situation, she had experienced so many
difficult things in her close family that the negatively appraised meaning of her life and her losses
were in conflict with her worldview that said there is a good and fair God. Sometimes her PDP
experiences helped to mediate between the two conflicting voices. At other times the voice of
unfairness and the feeling of a lack of meaning were stronger, causing Jeanette not to believe in God.
Jeanette: Once in a while I believe in God and once in a
while I don't believe in God. So. But then I think a little
more on how unfair life is. Then I begin to wonder if there is
a God. Why should some get everything and others nothing?
Jeanette: Av og til tror jeg på Gud og av og til tror jeg ikke
på Gud. Sånn. Men da tenker jeg jo litt mer på det hvor
urettferdig livet er. Da begynner jeg å lure på om det er en
Gud. Hvorfor skal noen få alt og noen ingenting?
The case of Jeanette, the temporal and situational dimension was visible. Different voices dominated
at different times, or in different situations, thus making her worldview movable.
Worldview is not only made up of the voices of different elements fitting together. Ambiguities and
contradictions within the worldview, as well as the different individual and collective voices
contributing to the definition of worldview make the dynamics more complicated. In the case of
Linda, where there was conflict between her PDP experiences and some of the voices defining her
Christian worldview, other voices came in and gave her a hand. In her situation, a priest and a deacon
who both belonged to the local church, simultaneously supported her extraordinary abilities and
became a third position, mediating between the two conflicting voices. For Elisabeth, who
experienced a conflict between two sense making systems: one belonging to her spiritual worldview,
and the other belonging to her work as a researcher, there were two different domains in which she
used different voices.
255
In the case of Vidar, whose worldview as an atheist went in a contrary direction to his PDP
experience, the significance of his perception was reduced to an indifferent position. The perception
did not mean much to him. The sense making was accordingly not very important for him to spend
time on. One can speculate whether the elements of sense making and significance influenced each
other in a dynamic way so as to accommodate the one to the other. However, there may also be other
reasons for the relatively low sense making and significance of Vidar’s PDP perception, as I have
analyzed in 9.1.3.
The ability to make sense of a PDP experience seems to be important for almost all the participants.
Also, their cultural interpretive resources were utilized to make sense of the perceived significance.
Torill: No, so in this way I actually live with it the entire
time. And for me it’s very natural, and I’m very happy as a
result because after all I have them around, and I know that
they wish me well, right. I’m not alone even if I walk around
on this earth in the sleet and my winter boots and gray
weather, and in such a way there is meaning in it, it is love,
there are things which will happen. It becomes very
meaningful for me because it gives life more dimensions.
Existence becomes richer.
Torill: Nei, så sånn lever jeg egentlig med det hele tiden. Og
for meg er det veldig naturlig, og jeg er veldig glad for det
fordi at jeg har de jo rundt meg, og jeg vet at de vil meg
godt, ikke sant. Jeg er ikke alene selv om jeg går rundt her
på jorda med sludd og vinterstøvler og grått vær og sånn så
er det mening i det, det er betydning i det, det er kjærlighet,
det er ting som skal skje. Det blir veldig meningsfylt for
meg for det gir livet flere dimensjoner. Tilværelsen blir
rikere.
Summary and reflections
The dynamics of meaning making of the PDP experiences can take many forms. Both sense making
and significance can consist of different voices that may be in coalition with each other, but are not
necessarily so. This meaning making is somewhat different from the meaning making model of
Chrystal Park which is used in some studies of PDP, and in the psychology of religion (Benore &
Park, 2004; Park, 2005; Steffen & Coyle, 2011). The basic idea of Park is that meaning making
involves attempts to restore congruence between global meaning (worldview) and situational meaning
(here: the appraised meaning of the loss) (Benore & Park, 2004). In my analysis of the dynamics of
meaning making in the PDP experiences, I have identified voices that are accommodating to each
other. However, there are also cases where the dynamics are in opposition to each other, without
changing one or the other, thus allowing more dissonance than the meaning making model of Park
seems to allow for.
Using the conceptual framework of DST, one can say that in some cases the dynamics between the
sense making of the loss, the PDP experience and the worldview work as coalitions of positions that
are compatible with one another, or they are accommodated to each other, thereby strengthening and
256
reinforcing each other. Together they form a stabilizing force in the internal and external domains of
the self (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010).
However, there are many different voices in play when the multi-voiced self is engaged in meaning
making. As I have shown in the case of Linda, there are voices from church leaders, from local
people, her individual voices of self-characteristics, cultural resources from her milieu and from the
larger media-world—all taking part in the meaning making process. Some of the voices work together
in a coalition, but others are dissonant, creating counter positions. In cases of dissonant voices I have
analyzed a third position, mediating between negative social voices and the voices of the positive
experience (significance).
The PDP experience itself can also dynamically function as a third position between the worldview
and the experience of loss, mediating between the belief in a fair and good divinity, and the unfair
experience of loss. The PDP experience can also function in a promoter position, in which significant
others (also deceased people) continue their influence in life through giving positive support, help and
enrichment (significance).
This corresponds to the two-fold function of PDP in the meaning making process: as an experience
which is used in the meaning making around loss, and as an experience which in itself is made
meaning of.
257
10.2. Summary and findings
Chapter 10 has analyzed the dynamics of meaning making between grief, worldview, sense making
and significance. The main findings can be summarized in the following points:

Sense making and significance of the PDP experience seems to be connected in that the
significance of the PDP can be used to make sense of the experience, and in that the
significance must also be made sense of. Moreover: If there are no positive interpretive
resources (from worldview) in use in the sense making, one can still experience PDP, but
often not as a positive significant experience

Religious/spiritual worldview and grief seems to be closely connected through the PDP
experience. The PDP experience may open for religious/spiritual interpretations, and religious/
spiritual interpretations may help to make sense of the loss. The PDP experience can further
function as a third position between the worldview (global meaning) and the grief and loss
(situational meaning).

The dynamics of sense making of PDP experiences are complex, and there are different
possible outcomes to the process; coalition between different but compatible voices (although
they may look disparate by an outside observer), division of contrasting voices into separate
domains of life, accommodating one to the other, keeping contrasting voices with the help of a
third position the PDP experience fosters a religious or spiritual sense making of a death, a
sense making that is concurrently used to understand the extraordinary experience and
accommodate the loss.
258
Chapter 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
I have summarized the findings in the analyses after the respective chapters. I have through the
analysis attempted to answer the research questions: What characterizes PDP perceptions?(chapter 6),
How do people make sense of their PDP experiences?(chapter 7), What is the significance of PDP
experiences to the person who has experienced them? (chapter 7). The secondary research questions
asking for sense making and significance of grief (chapter 8) and worldview (chapter 9) is also
analyzed, and so are the dynamics between sense making, significance, grief and worldview (chapter
10). Before ending this analysis part of the thesis, I will take the main findings that will be used in the
discussion and summarize them in some bullet points:

Most of the perceivers find their experience positive, reacting with positive emotional
responses, and attributing positive functions to the experience.

Mostly the PDP is perceived as helpful in accommodating to bereavement as well as
deepening and expanding the perceiver’s worldviews.

Although elements of grief theories and religious or spiritual worldviews are used to make
sense of the PDP experience, neither grieving nor holding a religious or spiritual worldview
are prerequisites to experiencing PDP. Grief are in some situations even seen to hinder the
PDP experience.

The perceived positive significance of the PDP experience seems to be closely connected to
the ability to make sense of the PDP experience through one’s worldview.

The dynamics of sense making of PDP experiences are complex, and there are different
possible outcomes to the process; coalition between different but compatible voices, division
of contrasting voices into separate domains of life, accommodating one to the other, keeping
contrasting positions with the help of a mediating, third position.

PDP experiences are perceived on a continuum from vague to clear.

Although PDP experiences often are frequent and vivid the first time of bereavement, they
may also occur many years later, sometimes as a first time PDP experience.

PDP experiences are perceived as occurring in two- or three-dimensional space as (1)
intermediate space between the “inside” and the “outside” of the perceiver (2) with the
deceased perceived “physically” in the room. For those holding a religious/spiritual
worldview, the deceased is simultaneously (3) placed in another dimension.
259
260
PART III: DISCUSSION
The analysis has shown that most of the participants evaluated their PDP experience as being positive,
attributing positive emotions and functions to their continuing bonds with the deceased. They further
considered the experience as significant to their grief process, as well as deepening their worldview
and providing spiritual benefits. There were certainly nuances and exceptions to that picture.
Negative emotional responses and ambivalence towards the helpfulness of the PDP experience in
adapting to grief were also expressed. In that respect the ability to make sense of the PDP perception
seemed to be crucial. In the following I will discuss these findings further in relation to relevant
theories. Specifically, I will use the two theories that I presented in the theory chapter, and which I
have employed in the analysis: the Continuing Bonds Theory (CBT) and the Dialogical Self Theory
(DST). However, I will also discuss other relevant theories that are part of a larger debate that I will
enter through the findings of this study.
In the analysis chapter I applied the two theories described in the theory chapter to focus on specific
themes in the material, and to structure the analysis around a conceptual framework. However, I also
pointed to certain theoretical elements which, on being encountered in the material, I realized had the
potential to be developed further. In the following discussion I will create a trialogue between the
findings that I have analyzed from the material and the two main theoretical perspectives. The
outcomes of this trialogue will be used to engage in the debate around the role of PDP experiences in
accommodation to bereavement, a debate in which meaning making, worldview, and spiritual and
personal growth all play a part.
261
262
Chapter 12: POST DEATH PRESENCE – THROUGH,
BETWEEN AND BEYOND GRIEF AND WORLDVIEW
As presented in chapter 2 and 3, the two last decades of research have shown that continuing bonds
with the deceased are not pathological per se. Continuing bonds are neither a manifestation of a
maladaptive or dysfunctional grief process. On the contrary, the different expression of continuing
bonds is considered a normal neurological reaction in the first phase of mourning. However, when
such expressions last for several years after death, the views among the researchers differ. Some
researchers regard particular kinds of long lasting bonds as a sign of maladaptive responses to grief
(Field, 2008), while others argue in favor of normality and possibly adaptive outcomes (Klass, 2006b).
Discussion in the field now centers on the way in which the continuing connection with a deceased
person is either effective or ineffective in coping with bereavement. In the discussion the question of
the time since death is crucial, as is meaning making and also the type of continuing bonds. Nigel
Field143 is one of the researchers who have contributed most to the adaptiveness research by
differentiating the concept of continuing bonds, and thus specifying a type that is similar to the PDP
experience. I will thus take Field’s research as my starting point in discussing 1) how PDP
perceptions can be understood in relation to the self, 2) how PDP as a particular type of continuing
bonds expression is involved in accommodation to loss, and 3) how meaning making of the PDP
experience is negotiated.
The first part relates mainly to my first research question, which asks for the characteristics of the PDP
experience. The second relates to the research question regarding the significance of the PDP for the
receiver, focusing mostly on the grief process, and the third will relate to the research question about
meaning making as sense making where the participant’s worldview is central.
143
Nigel Field was an influential researcher within the field of bereavement and trauma research. Until his death, in
December 2013, he was the Associate Editor for the renowned journal Death Studies and a member of the editorial board
of Journal of Loss and Trauma. He also wrote several influential publications and initiated research groups with colleagues
and students through which he influenced several researchers. (http://www.paloaltou.edu/content/tribute-dr-nigel-fieldslegacy read 01.07.2014)
263
12.1. Externalized continuing bonds in a spatial and porous self
12.1.1. Between internalized and externalized continuing bonds
Continuing bonds is a broad term, and in order to be more specific and extend previous literature on
adjustment to bereavement, N. Field144 proposed a division of continuing bonds expressions into two
forms: externalized and internalized (Field & Filanosky, 2010). To recapitulate Field’s main points,
externalized continuing bonds expressions are alleged sensory perceptions in which the deceased is
experienced as an external presence. In Field and Filanosky’s (2010) survey externalized continuing
bonds are manifest through items, such as “I saw him right before me” and “I actually felt the
deceased’s touch.” Internalized expressions, on the other hand, are closer to memory, like thoughts
and imaginations. In the same survey the internalized continuing bonds expressions are
communicated through items such as “I imagined the deceased’s voice encouraging me to keep going”
and “I thought about the deceased as a role model who I try to be like” and “I thought about the
positive influence of the deceased on who I am today” (Field & Filanosky, 2010: 11).145
PDP perceptions, which form the scope of the present study, correspond to the externalized continuing
bonds expressions in Field’s terminology. However, they also encompass more than that defined by
Field. As outlined in section 6.1.8, in the analysis chapter, the PDP perceptions can be visualized on a
continuum from a vague, quasi-perceptual sense of presence, to clearer and more vivid sensory
perceptions.
Sense of
presence
Feeling the
dead is
somewhere
close
More physical
sense of
presence
Can feel where
in the room the
dead is
"seeing
/hearing" more
vaguely, eg.
shadows,
sounds of steps
Full "sensory"
experience,
visual, auditive,
tactile
Figure 12.1 (see also figure 6.1.8)
144
For the case of simplicity, I will, throughout this chapter, refer to Field when presenting his theory and findings, although
his research was done together with other scholars. All the researchers are, however, listed in the references.
145
What is striking when examining Field & Filanosky’s items is that the internalized continuing bonds type has positive
emotional and functional aspects added, as, for instance, “the positive influence” and “secure base” and “encouraging me
to keep going”. This positive emotional coloring is absent from the items belonging to the externalized type. This is also
pointed out by Steffen & Coyle (2012) as a consideration to bear in mind before taking this research as evidence that
externalized continuing bonds expressions can be indicative of maladaptive grief, whereas the internalized corresponds to
personal growth.
264
In the figure (10.1) the externalized continuing bonds expressions are on the right hand side, whereas
the internalized are outside the scope of the continuum. In other words, the more quasi-sensory
perceptions on the left hand side of the spectrum in the figure are not described in Field’s externalized
– internalized conceptualization. In my view, this polarization leaves out the most common of the
PDP perceptions, namely the sense of presence experience (Steffen & Coyle, 2012; Rees, 1971).146
This may have implications when a differentiation between internalized and externalized expressions
is used to distinguish between adaptive and maladaptive grief responses—a discussion that I will come
back to in 12.3. For now, I contend that continuing bonds expressions are most accurately
conceptualized on a continuum, from internalized to externalized perceptions. In quantitative surveys,
however, where closed categories are needed, it would be possible to crystallize a third form of
continuing bonds, between the internalized and externalized, which corresponds to the quasi-sensory
sense of presence.
In addition to the degrees of perceptibility of the deceased, I have analyzed the perceptual space of the
PDP, which is found to be experienced between the “inside” and the” outside” of the perceiver. Not
surprisingly, the clearer sensory perceptions are felt as being more on the outside than are the sense of
presence experiences. Yet, the sensory PDP perceptions are clearly distinguished from encounters
with living people. The deceased is not perceived in the same way as when alive, yet almost all the
participants feel that the voice or vision is belonging to the deceased and not to themselves. The PDP
experiences are thus not felt as memory, or pure imagination, but as a perceptible, although deceased,
person. Such perceptions of the deceased may, according to Field, imply a “dissociated state
involving intrusive possession by another mind who literally exists in the present as a separate center
of initiative and who can directly influence the bereaved as though still alive” (Field & Filanosky,
2010: 3). As I have reflected in 1.5.2., I agree with Field that externalized perceptions may imply
intrusive phenomena, for example symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, but I do not agree that
the externalized perceptions, per se, imply intrusions. I further contend that it is possible to
understand the deceased as a separate center of initiative in the self without necessarily understanding
the self as dissociated.147
In the following I will discuss the understanding of PDP perceptions as externalized expressions in the
extended self. How can the PDP perceptions be understood as occurring between the “outside” and
146
This is also mentioned by Steffen and Coyle who contend that Field & Filanosky fail to tap the most common experience,
namely the sense of presence. There are no items asking for “feeling the presence” in Field & Filanosky’s 16 items measure
(Steffen & Coyle, 2012).
147
It must be noted that Field, in his use of the term dissociative, is not implying a DSM-like diagnosis. Field is not pointing
at a disorder, which is identified in the DSM by a set of symptoms. Rather, his use of dissociation is a marker of unresolved
loss, understood at a “process-structural level in terms of failure to integrate the working model of the deceased with the
reality of the loss such that incompatible working models of the deceased as alive and dead coexist” (Field & Filanosky,
2010: 4)
265
the “inside” of the perceiver, and between the imaginal and the perceptual space? How can the
deceased be present as a separate center of initiative without understanding the self as dissociated?
The following section aims to build theoretical underpinnings for the arguments I develop in the
concluding part of my study.
12.1.2. PDP experiences in intermediate space
DST, with its focus of the self as a “mind space” (Hermans & Kempen, 1993:166), is in my view a
good frame for theorizing the placement of the PDP experience in the domain of the extended self.148
DST holds that the boundaries between inside and outside are porous. When the participants’
phenomenological experiences show that their PDP perceptions take part neither merely on the
outside, nor merely on the inside, the permeable and porous self149 that Hermans proposes opens the
possibility of viewing the experience as floating between the inside and the outside domains.
To recapitulate Hermans’ theory, the self consists of an external domain (not to be confused with
Field’s externalized experiences) which is populated by “the other in the self”, and an internal domain
which provides the space for the “internal I positions” (Hermans, 2012). Both the internal and the
external domains are multi-voiced, and consist of intertwined, individual, social and collective voices,
with porous lines between the different domains.
148
When I reflect on the spatiality of the PDP perceptions in the following, I take as my starting point the subjective
experience of the participants. It is the perceiver’s sense of self which I try to build into the DST. As DST is viewed as an
experiential theory of the self (Zock, 2011), this approach of dialoguing with the material in the study will, I believe, be
appropriate.
149
The term porous self is hardly used by Hermans. However, others have characterized his theory as building on an idea
of a membrane between the self and society and culture which is becoming porous (Lehmann, 2013). To express the notion
that self and society are closely interconnected, Hermans most often uses the concept “society of mind”. Hermans’ idea is
in some way similar to Charles Taylor’s concept of the porous self, where the boundary between self and other is fuzzy, but
it does not encompass what Taylor puts forth as the idea of a pre-modern enchanted world where forces can cross a porous
boundary and shape our lives (Taylor, 2007). However, as I will come back to, porosity in vertical terms, between the
natural and the supernatural, is theorized by others as an extension of the DST (Lindegger & Alberts, 2011).
266
Internal
domain
External
domain
Outside
domain
Figure 12.2 (Hermans 2012: 38)
In the language of Dialogical Self Theory, the PDP experiences as I have analyzed them will be placed
in the external domain, as opposed to the internal domain of the extended self. Because the material
shows that participants experienced the voice, vision, smell or touch as belonging to the deceased and
not to themselves, the deceased’s voice or vision is the- other- in- the- self, and thus it is situated in
the external domain. The deceased, as the other and not me, is accurately articulated by one of the
participants in the following sentence, which I also quoted in the analysis chapter: “It is not my
thoughts speaking to my thoughts. No. It is his voice.”
Living people are similarly voiced in the external domain. According to Hermans, living friends and
relatives do have an external position in the self, as well as being encountered in the outside domain.
When it comes to perceptions of deceased people, however, the placement on the outside is naturally
more complicated. Voices of deceased people are certainly placed in the external (but still inside)
domain of the self, but if they are to be placed on the outside—as the PDP perceivers partly do—one
easily takes a stand on the ontological existence of the dead. It seems as though Hermans is taking
that stand when he claims that external positions function mainly in the outside world when they are
“real” others—like parents, friends and colleagues. But, they belong mainly to the inside world of the
individual if they are imaginal others—like imaginal lovers, deceased parents or wise advisors
(Hermans & Kempen, 1993:78). This distinction is made, although Hermans holds that the
perceptible and the imaginal are intertwined, both in external (inner) and outer positions, and although
he contends against a dichotomy between inner and outer worlds. However, the emphasis he places on
267
the word mainly (in “mainly” of the inside or outside world) opens the way for an understanding of a
spectrum, where both the perceptible and imaginal are present, but in different degrees.
The phenomenological sense of self, when participants perceive a PDP, is on a spectrum between the
inside (external domain) and the outside domain of the self. The participants have different
perceptions of seeing the dead: “inside their head, yet placed on the outside” or “from outside” or
“outside, but not in the same way as I see you”, but what they have in common is that it is not as
“inside” as a memory or fantasy, and not as “outside” as an encounter with a living person. Thus, if
we consider the participants’ spatial sense of their PDP experiences, one can stipulate an intermediate
domain, which is between the outside and the external inside domains in the self. That is; the
perceptions are taking part in both the inner and outer, yet still not fully in any of them creating a
distinctive form of perceptual space.
Internal
domain
External
domain
Intermediate
domain
Outside
domain
Figure 10.2b. Intermediate domain
To introduce an intermediate domain into Hermans’ sketch of the self, visualizes the PDP experience
as a perceptible phenomenon, yet not the same as perceptions of living people.
Dennis Klass, in his conceptualization and theorizing of continuing bonds, reflects on the same
placement, and proposes that interacting with the dead has the character of both outer and inner
reality: “It is not simply an objective presence, for the meaning of the experience is strongly personal.
Neither can it be said to be simply subjective. Many parents in the study argue strongly against
268
reducing the experience to psychic reality, or as one person said ‘don’t tell me that this is just in my
head’” (Klass, 1999: 41).
Klass does not elaborate much on the spatial self in his writings, but he uses the concept of an
intermediate area, which he takes from the British psychoanalyst D. Winnicott. This area of
experience is, in the words of Winnicott, a place for solace in the “strain of relating inner and outer
reality” (Winnicott, 1971: 13). I will not enter into the theory of Winnicott here, but I will suggest that
localizing an intermediate space, area or domain, between what Hermans calls the “inside” and
“outside” worlds, allows more space for viewing PDP perceptions as falling between the imaginal and
perceptual—without making a priori judgments on the ontological existence of the deceased, and
whether they are placed and originating on the inside or on the outside of the mind.
12.1.3. PDP experiences in imaginal perceptual space
Both Hermans and Klass claim that people have dialogues with imaginal others, and that those
dialogues have influence on their lives. Hermans sometimes refers to “imaginal space”, sometimes to
“imaginal others”, and sometimes to “imaginal conversations”. He further posits that external
positions can be populated by “perceived, remembered or imagined” others (Hermans & Gieser,
2012:18). In Hermans’ vocabulary one can thus engage in perceptible conversations with perceptible
others (in the outside domain), imaginal conversations with perceptible others (in the external inside
domain, but possibly taking place while being in the outside domain), and imaginal conversations with
imaginal others (external inside domain). Yet, the perceptible and the imaginal are interwoven in all
types of conversations. For the perceivers of PDP, what is called imaginal by Hermans may appear
perceptible, although in a different way than the perception of living people. Thus, I will
conceptualize PDP experiences as imaginal-perceptual conversations with imaginal-perceptual
others.
I agree with Hermans and Kempen who emphasize that it is a misunderstanding to consider imaginal
space as something purely internal. When talking with people we also have imaginations; we imagine
what they will say next, and what that will mean for us. In other words, the imaginal space coexists
with the perceptible space in conversations with living people. Further, the meaning of for instance a
mother may be more determined by the positions she holds in an imaginal space, in which one can
relate to her as a child, an adolescent or an adult, rather than in the perceptible position of being
“actually” present (Hermans & Kempen, 1993). The importance of imaginal space is relevant to the
PDP experiences, which are often experienced as a continued relationship, where the meaning the
person had in the life of the perceiver works together with the PDP perceptions of the dead. However,
269
the externalized PDP experiences are also experienced as perceptible, thus giving an imaginalperceptual experience with an imaginal-perceptual other.
This imaginal-perceptual experience is related to the two - (or three-) dimensional space which I
elicited in the analysis.
12.1.4. PDP experiences in three- dimensional space
Through the analysis I found that the PDP perceptions could be placed in different dimensions (see
section 6.3.4.). I have now discussed the first dimension which is the intermediate perceptual space
between the “inside” and the “outside” of the perceiver, which I have called intermediate imaginalperceptual experiences. The second dimension is that the deceased through the externalized PDP
experiences is perceived “physically” in the room, allocated for instance in a chair or standing on the
floor. I have discussed some implications of this dimension and its conceptualization on a continuum
from the vaguer to the clearer, and from non-localized presence to placed and almost tangible
appearance. For those holding a religious/spiritual worldview, the deceased is simultaneously placed
in a third dimension beyond time and space, a notion I will come back to when discussing the meaning
making.
As articulated by Leudar and Thomas (2000), “inner” and “outer” can have various contingent
meanings. In their study of verbal hallucination which I have referred to in the analysis chapter (see
section 6.3.4.), they found, for instance, examples of a twofold “outer”: one supernatural, which is the
participant’s own personal “outer”, and one mundane “outer”, which is shared with others. Thus,
although extraordinary experiences are seldom part of a shared social world, they should not
automatically be allocated in the mind to an inner domain only. I will accordingly consider the second
dimension of the PDP experience as a “peculiar outer.” Although this experience is usually not
experienced simultaneously by others, it should not necessarily be perceived as a pure inner
experience.
Hermans claims that one should rather speak of an imaginal social world than a purely inner world
when emphasizing the interaction with somebody who is felt to be there. The imaginal social world,
or imaginal-perceptual social world may then be inhabited by imaginal-perceptual people with whom
one have a dialogue, although the PDP experience is not a shared perception, but most often
experienced alone.
270
12.1.5. PDP experiences in a multi-voiced dialogical space
Adding to the argument where PDP perceptions are viewed as taking place in an imaginal perceptual
social world, rather than in an inner world, is the notion that imaginal others in DST (and I will add:
also imaginal-perceptible others), are typically perceived as having a spatially separated position.
When discussing this, Hermans uses the example of imaginal contact with deceased parents or friends.
He also refers to non-Western communities where the belief is held that the spirits are like “a man
within a man”. The spirits are experienced spatially, with their own will and desires. In the DST,
imaginal figures are not simply an aspect of the self that is subordinated to the overarching
organization of the I. Imaginal figures exist as a separate voice or position (Hermans, Rijks, &
Kempen, 1993). In the case of the spirit in the example above, the spirit is not conceived as the
subject of the man’s inner life, but as something objective that dwells in the man, and is spatially
connected with him, and hence can also be spatially separated from him (Hermans et al., 1993). The
dialogical self is thus contending against the notion of the internalization of the other in the self.
Internalization reduces the process to only one voice and to only one author. It ignores the fact that,
while the person is creating an imaginal figure, the imaginal figure is also creating the person. I will
follow the same argument for the imaginal-perceptible experiences of PDP. With this way of
thinking, the deceased can live his or her own life and influence the perceiver.
Organizing the self in this non- hierarchical and decentralized way is a core feature of the DST. It has,
however, been discussed whether the self, through this organization, is falling apart, or whether the
DST reflects a self which easily turns into dissociative states. Arguing against that, Hermans holds
that splitting and dissociation does not have to be the result of a decentralized self. The difference
between a multi-voiced self and a dissociative phenomenon is, according to Hermans, not found in the
parts of the self, but in the organization. In the dissociated self the I is unable to move flexibly from
one part of the self to another, and the dialogue between the different parts is hence impeded (Lysaker
& Hermans, 2007). The multi-voiced self, on the other hand, is able to move freely between the
positions. However, as I described in the theory chapter, in section 3.1, there are degrees of dialogue
and flexibility, and some positions may at times bring others into silence, although still keeping the
self together.
Related to Field’s notion of externalized continuing bonds expressions as implying a dissociated self
because two incompatible working models are coexisting: the deceased as alive and the deceased as
dead (Field & Filanosky, 2010), the DST gives theoretical underpinnings to an understanding of how
two seemingly contradictory positions can coexist without considering the self as dissociated. In the
analysis I have shown the two positions: the participants know that their family member or friend is
dead, yet from another position they experience them as alive—and not only in memory, but as a
271
separate center of initiative. The voices may exist simultaneously, and they may be in dialogue with
each other, creating a common coalition of being dead, yet living. As one of the participants in the
present study said: “So, I know for sure he is dead, I have put him in the soil as ashes, I’m not crazy.
But I have also got a new dimension in life by knowing that this is not the end.” If there is flexibility
to the different voices in this statement, and the perceiver is capable of holding a meta-perspective,
this seemingly contradictory statement does not have to be a sign of a dissociated mind (Dimaggio,
Hermans, & Lysaker, 2010).
Two other crucial points are connected to the question of dissociation: First, in the understanding that
people can perceive the presence of a deceased person without dissociating from reality, their
worldview is significant. A religious belief in an afterlife (“this is not the end”) will often mediate
between the PDP perceptions and the reality (“I know he is dead”). I will discuss this further in
section 12.3.
Second, Field theorizes that externalized continuing bonds are a marker for unresolved loss because
they imply “disbelief that the other is dead” (Field & Filanosky, 2010: 3). The quotation above from a
PDP perceiver shows that externalized continuing bonds experiences are not necessarily accompanied
by this disbelief. As reflected, the perceivers often regard the externalized continuing bonds as
different from those with a living person. Perceivers can know that the person is dead, yet feel that he
or she continues to live in way that is different from that before death. However, this does not mean
that there are no links between externalized continuing bonds and unresolved loss. This is what I will
discuss in the following section: PDP experiences, unresolved loss and accommodation to grief.
272
12.2. Externalized continuing bonds and accommodation to grief
12.2.1. Critique of the adaptiveness-studies
The role of PDP experiences in accommodation to loss and its implication for personal growth150
relates to a current debate in the field of grief research: Does continuing connection with a deceased
person help or hinder the coping with bereavement?
As presented in chapter 2, since Klass, Silverman and Nickman’s (1996) seminal critique of the
breaking bonds paradigm, a number of studies have attempted to identify how continuing bonds
influence accommodation to grief (e.g. Epstein, Kalusz & Berger, 2006; Field, Gal-Oz, & Bonnano,
2003; Field et al., 1999; Shut, Stroebe, Boelen, & Zijerveld, 2006). Some researchers, in particular the
attachment theorists, have raised the additional question whether certain forms of continuing bonds are
more adaptive than others. Field’s study explores this issue by examining adaptiveness and
maladaptiveness through differentiating between internalized and externalized continuing bonds
expressions (Field & Filanosky, 2010).
The adaptiveness studies have, however, been inconclusive, and they have also been subject to
critique. Critics have questioned the relevance and the possibility of determining the effect of
continuing bonds on bereavement. As there may be conceptual overlap between grief and continuing
bonds (Boelen, Stroebe, Schut, & Zijerveld, 2006), and many other factors may influence
accommodation to loss (Klass, 1999, 2006b), some theorists call for more refined studies, while others
question the concept of researching the linear effects of continuing bonds. Dennis Klass, as one of the
originators of the continuing bonds paradigm, has taken issue with those studies that attempt to test the
hypothesis that continuing bonds either help or hinder healthy adjustment to bereavement. Klass
disputes the use of simple questions of causal relationships between continuing bonds and adjustment.
Instead he proposes that continuing bonds are part of a “web of bonds and meanings”, and thus a
linear model of cause and effect is to oversimplify the relation between continuing bonds and grief.
Following the concerns of Klass, and discussing the topic from a qualitative point of view, I will use
the findings of my present study to examine parts of the complex interplay of PDP perceptions and the
experience of grief accommodation. Relating to the last section (12.1.), I will continue to use Field’s
research as my starting point, but will now pay more attention to his attachment theory framework,
which he elaborates and discusses in an interpretation of his findings.
150
As mentioned in 1.6., in the grief, trauma, stress and coping literature, the attention has shifted to include a focus on
positive changes and personal growth, rather than focusing solely on cessation of grief and distress symptoms. The
personal growth, or a revised sense of self in the world, results from the ability to successfully address the challenges
encountered by bereavement (Field & Filanosky, 2010).
273
12.2.2. Externalized continuing bonds as a secure base
Field suggests that externalized continuing bonds expressions indicate a maladaptive grief response.
By using an attachment theory framework, he proposes that in an early searching phase (Worden,
2009), when the attachment system is activated to look for the newly deceased, externalized
expressions may appear. At best, these experiences may give temporary relief from the emotional pain
of the loss. When they occur more than one year post loss, they indicate maladaptive adjustment in
reflecting a failure to relinquish the goal of regaining physical proximity.151 Cognitively, externalized
continuing bonds are indicative of a lapse in the monitoring of reasoning, implying disbelief that the
other is dead (Field & Filanosky, 2010). Internalized expressions, on the other hand, function as an
internalized secure base, obtained through psychological proximity, as opposed to physical proximity
(Field, Gao, & Paderna, 2005). Internalized continuing bonds are accordingly more likely to be
adaptive to growth—even though they are also connected to complicated grief.152 In their study from
2010, Field and Filanosky found that externalized continuing bonds expressions were positively
associated with violent death and responsibility for the death, whereas internalized continuing bonds
were negatively associated with these risk factors, as well as uniquely positively linked to personal
growth153 (Field &Filanosky, 2010).154 Based on this study, Field suggests that the relation of
continuing bonds to grief resolution is connected to its type of expression. However he states that
there is no simple one-to-one correspondence between the type of continuing bonds expression and the
internalization, which in turn may lead to personal growth (Field, Gao & Paderna, 2005).
In my present study, where the participants were selected particularly to include externalized
experiences in a non-clinical sample, it is relevant to discuss the perceivers’ subjective externalized
experiences, which according to Field are associated with complicated grief. This discussion is also
151
In attachment theory, the basic idea is that there is an inborn motivational system aimed at maintaining proximity to
supportive others in times of need. The attachment system is activated under conditions of physical or psychological
threat, including separation from those relied upon for support and protection, namely the attachment figures. Activation
of the attachment system initiates a behavioral plan, or search effort, toward re-establishing proximity to the attachment
figure. According to attachment theory, the bereaved initially respond to the death of a significant person through search
efforts to recover the deceased (Bowlby, 1980; Parkes & Prigerson, 2010). Separation through death is accordingly not
registered as irrevocable at the attachment system level in the early phase of mourning (Field & Filanosky, 2010).
152
In their study from 2010, the types of continuing bonds (CB) were distinguished in relation to complicated grief
symptoms, but the path analysis suggested different ways to the connection. Those who had a closer relationship to the
deceased were more likely to report greater use of internalized CB, which in turn was associated with more severe grief.
On the other hand, relationship closeness was not linked to a positive association between externalized CB and complicated
grief symptoms (Field & Filanosky, 2010).
153
To measure complicated grief, Field et al. used items like “I think about the deceased so much that it can be hard for me
to do the things I normally do” and “ I feel like I have lost the ability to care about other people, or I feel distant from people
I care about”. Personal growth was measured with a post traumatic growth inventory comprising five factors: relating to
others, new possibilities, personal strength, spiritual change and appreciation of life (Field & Filanosky, 2010: 13).
The attachment theory point of view regarding the internalized continuing bonds’ connection to personal growth is that
positive change is understood as an involvement of the exploratory system. The exploratory system, which actively
engages in outside pursuits, is facilitated when there is a secure base. The internalized continuing bonds can serve this
function according to Field (Field, 2006).
154
See 1.7 for an alternative interpretations of these findings.
274
called for by Field himself as he admits that their measure does not provide specific information of
whether the externalized perceptions are perceived as positive, but it is just assumed, based on their
findings, that they are experienced as unbidden and distressing, similar to traumatic memories (Field
& Filanosky, 2010).
As presented in the analysis chapter, contrary to Field’s assumption, almost all the participants in my
present study subjectively evaluated their PDP experiences as positive (see section 7.2). Similar
results are found in other studies (chapter 2 and section 7.2.5). However, the subjective positive
emotional valuations in themselves do not warrant an interpretation of personal growth and
accommodation to loss. The positive valuations may, as Field suggests, only indicate a temporary
relief—although the findings in my study suggests that emotional attributions to the PDP experiences
can last for several years. What is therefore important to discuss, together with the emotional
response, is the function that the PDP experiences have in the daily life of the perceivers.
In that regard, it is striking that in most of the participants’ narrations, the externalized continuing
bonds expressions are described in a manner very similarly to that in which Field described the
internalized expressions, as a secure base, a safe haven, a role model, and an advisor (see section
7.2.5). Most of the participants also subjectively connect their externalized experiences with personal
growth—which in Field’s study is associated with internalized continuing bonds. Trying to
understand these dissonant findings in terms of Field’s attachment theory framework, one could ask if
the high prevalence of sense of presence experiences among the participants—which we discussed in
12.1—bring the functions of the PDP experiencer closer to the internalized than to the externalized
continuing bonds? The participants could be on their way to integrating their PDP experiences as a
psychological bond, rather than as a physiological one, and consequently resulting in internalized
functions. As my analysis elucidates that the sense of presence experience can be situated somewhere
between the externalized and internalized continuing bonds expressions, and that one and the same
person could report a mixture of different experiences, the dynamic could be understood as follows:
The externalized expressions happened in the first phase, soon after bereavement (similar to the
searching phase), but as time went by, step by step, the internalized experiences took over, and the
process of internalization of the deceased proceeded. In some cases this was exactly how the
participants presented their stories: Sensory PDP perceptions gradually gave way to sense of presence
experiences. This movement towards internalized experiences could certainly be interpreted as
consonant with the attachment theory framework of normal grief, relating the illusions and
hallucinations to the early searching phase, whereas internalization and psychological bonds are
developed later. As I did not study the internalized continuing bonds expressions, I cannot tell
whether this type of continuing bonds was finally taking over. However, the sense of presence
275
experiences, being situated between the externalized and internalized continuing bonds, could indicate
that the bereaved was on his or her way to accepting the death, and to continuing the bond in a more
psychologically internalized way.
Yet, many of the participants told a different story: A transformation from sensory perceptions to
sense of presence, over time, was not always the case. Rather, they reported sensory perceptions a
long time after the death, often in combination with sense of presence experiences. According to the
attachment theory framework, and Field’s findings, this should imply integration failure, unresolved
loss, and dissociation (Field & Filanosky, 2010), and not the positive evaluations and secure base
functions that the participants actually reported.
As I conducted the interviews some years after the deaths, there is certainly the possibility that the
participants have had time to adapt to the reality of loss, and thus to foster the positive functions of
continuing bonds. However, this eventual adaptation apparently did not stop the externalized
continuing bonds experiences. On the contrary, the participants continued to experience externalized
PDP, and they attributed positive emotions and functions to it. If we trust the positive functions
related to internalized expressions in Field’s research as a possibility for accommodation to
bereavement, the findings of this study seem to imply that it is not the type of continuing bonds in
itself that is indicative of either unresolved loss or personal growth. Certainly, externalized PDP can
work together with and reinforce difficulties in resolving loss, even when the PDP experience is
evaluated as comforting by the bereaved (see 8.2.). My point is that this is not always the case, and
theoretical understandings should also take into account the positive evaluation and function in the
reports of the perceivers of externalized continuing bonds expressions. Field may certainly be right
that there is an association between violent death or responsibility for death, and externalized
continuing bonds expressions. This association has also been found in other studies (Haraldsson,
2009). It is not surprising that violent loss is associated with complicated grief. However, even when
experiencing violent loss (which is the case for many of the participants in my study), it is possible
that externalized continuing bonds may have a positive function to play in accommodation to
bereavement, similar to the way in which Field describes the function of the internalized bonds.
Attachment theory provides a useful framework for understanding how continuing bonds may be
understood in the context of separation and loss. There is also theoretical potential for researching
adaptive and maladaptive continuing bonds through examining attachment styles—a possibility I have
not utilized in this dissertation as I did not ask specifically for early relationships, and thus my material
does not have enough information for such an analysis. However, there is a deficit in the theory, as
used by Field, as it is not describing how positive functions relating to the dead as a secure base can
276
accompany externalized continuing bonds. The findings of my study seem to indicate that some
perceivers use a sensory PDP experience as a secure base and a safe haven and thus, in attachment
theoretical language, the exploratory system which actively engages in outside pursuits is facilitated
(Field, 2006). In other words, not only the internalized, but also the sensory PDP experiences, may
provide the security, which during a difficult time is needed to continue living and searching for
personal growth after a loss.
12.2.3. Externalized continuing bonds through and beyond grief
Attachment theory describes how the attachment system of the bereaved continues to search for the
dead person as a result of separation and distress, and how by this dynamic it fosters PDP experiences
(Parkes & Prigerson, 2010). This idea does not account for the findings of the present study that in
some cases PDP experiences are seemingly not fostered by grief, as the people concerned report they
are not grieving, and therefore not searching for the lost person as a result of grieving, and yet are still
experiencing PDP. Neither, seemingly, does it account for the rather surprising finding that in some
cases grief is allegedly holding back or weakening PDP experiences. In those cases early grief is not
understood in terms of searching for the deceased. Rather it is described as being “shut down” or
“self- absorbed”, thereby reducing contact with the dead. This form of grieving seems to direct the
focus more onto the emotions of the bereaved than onto the deceased, and is apparently experienced
differently from the searching phase of attachment theory. It rather resembles a way of grieving that
one of the participants called “the grieving emphasizing I have lost” (see 8.1.2.). Speculatively, one
could ask if the lack of searching behavior in those cases is in fact reducing the PDP experiences.
However, the material provides too little information to theorize on this matter.
What these findings seem to imply is that there are different paths to experiencing PDP. It may come
during the first phase of loss, which can then be understood, as Field does, in terms of a searching
phase, but there may also be other ways, whether connected to early grief, to late grief, or to situations
without grief.
12.2.4. Externalized continuing bonds and meaning making
Modifying his notion of externalized continuing bonds indicating unresolved loss, Field introduces the
perspective of meaning making (Field, Gao, & Paderna, 2005). According to Field, if people can
make sense of their perceptions in the light of their worldview or meaning system, the continuing
277
bonds expressions are not dissociative. Religious or spiritual beliefs in an afterlife, used as an
interpreting resource for the PDP experience, provide an example of that.
Field admits that this meaning making perspective can, in fact, call into question the attachment theory
based understanding, as outlined in 12.2. However, he attempts a solution to this shortcoming by
distinguishing between two different dynamics: One dynamic is related to the searching phase and
reflects a disorganized strategy. The other dynamic is related to expressions that reflect a religious
worldview. The disorganized expressions are evident in illusory and hallucinatory continuing bonds
expressions. According to Field, illusions and hallucinations are of an intrusive nature, and reflect a
lack of integration within an overarching meaning system. The second dynamic involves a link
between the PDP experience and a religious belief, for instance that the deceased is in heaven and is
aware of the bereaved. If the externalized expression is linked with such a religious view, it would not
be indicative of dissociation and therefore of unresolved loss, in that it is fully compatible with the
person’s dominant belief system (Field et al., 2005). Furthermore, experiences that are culturally
prescribed, and ritually deliberately enacted, can be adaptive (Field, 2006). The reason for this is that
in the specific cultural context PDP perceptions are not in the same way segregated from reality, and
thus not hallucinatory and dissociative. Therefore, those who are religious may be comforted by such
experiences, whereas those who are not religious may have difficulty assimilating such experiences
(Field et al., 2005).
This way of theorizing is applicable to the present study. When the perceivers can make sense of their
PDP perceptions through the positive application of their worldview, their experience is not
necessarily dissociative, as it is not segregated from the reality that they hold. Following on from that,
their externalized experiences may indeed be adaptive. One of the participants expressed just this, by
saying: “If I think of him as dead but not gone, I am not sad anymore.”
Different theorists function within the continuing bonds paradigm: Klass draws more on object
relations theory than on attachment theory, but he does expand the theoretical framework to include
the socio-cultural perspective. He states that attachment theory is valuable, but could be usefully
extended beyond the mother-child, or pair bond, to include attachment relationships that exist at other
levels, signifying social membership or identity with family, tribe, nation and religion.155 In Klass’
model of the web of bonds and meanings the relationship with the transcendent, and with the place in
the universe, as well as the meaning of the life and the death of the deceased, is tracked, together with
the close attachments and relations (Klass, 1999). I follow Klass in his concern to include a larger
scope of bonds when analyzing continuing bonds, and not least the religious elements of meaning.
155
However, Klass also warns against the over-extension of attachment theory by applying the template of the separation
of a child from its mother to other relationships (Klass, 1999). Thus by calling for an extension of attachment bonds, he
probably denotes an expansion of the theoretical framework.
278
This is not to say that attachment theory has not been used within religion,156 but the way in which
attachment theory is used to differentiate an unhealthy form of continuing bonds, by identifying them
with experiences belonging to the searching phase, and with dissociations between experience and
reality, does not hold true for religiously interpreted PDP experiences.
In recent years, the meaning making perspective, including spiritual and religious meaning making,
has gained broad support in grief research. I will turn to that in the following section by discussing the
importance and dynamics of sense making.
12.3. PDP Externalized continuing bonds through multi-voiced meaning
making
12.3.1. Multi-voiced and dialogical sense making
The meaning making perspective has become central in recent grief research. In particular, the way in
which people make sense of their experiences has been found to be crucial in accommodation to
bereavement, and in experiencing personal growth after the loss of a significant other. As outlined in
chapter 2, the meaning making perspective in the grief context is most significantly studied by
Neimeyer et al.157 His research indicates that the ability to make sense of death is more important for
accommodation to loss and personal growth than is the ability to find benefits in the situation,
although there are reasons to suggest that sense making and benefit finding are interlaced and
influence each other. In fact, according to Neimeyer and colleagues, sense making accounts for as
much as fifteen times more of the variability in a parent’s report of complicated grief symptomatology
than factors such as time and violent or natural death (Keese et al., 2008).
When implementing the distinction of sense making and benefit finding or significance in relation to
the PDP experience, the main focus in this dissertation is not on the sense making of the loss itself,
e.g. answering how the death of a young loved child could happen, but the emphasis is on how the
PDP perceptions make sense to the perceiver (see 1.3). However, the sense making of the death is
naturally intertwined with the sense making of the PDP. I have shown in chapter 10 how the PDP
experience fosters a religious or spiritual sense making of a death, a sense making that is concurrently
used to understand the extraordinary experience and accommodate the loss. Furthermore, parts of
157
See for instance Neimeyer (2012); Lichtenthal, Currier, Neimeyer, & Keese (2010), and Keese, Currier, & Neimeyer
(2008).
279
grief theories are applied as cultural resources to assist in making sense of the extraordinary
experience. PDP experiences are also found to mediate between grief and worldview, upholding the
notion of the deceased as dead, yet present.
When making sense of their PDP experiences, the perceivers draw on different resources: bits of grief
and crisis theories, theories from folk traditions, and from religious and spiritual beliefs. For an
outside observer, the different resources in sense making may seem disparate. For the perceiver,
however, it can be logical, and make enough sense to keep going. There may be seemingly
contrasting religious beliefs present in the worldview of one and the same person (e.g. keeping the
Christian faith from childhood, living a secular life, and using alternative practices like healing and
mediumship), or an apparently contrasting intersection of religious beliefs and secular beliefs (e.g. a
belief in an afterlife, where the deceased exists as a living soul who can influence the life of the living,
and a belief in grief and crisis theories as causing PDP perceptions). Moreover, the notion which Field
holds as contradictory, that the deceased is dead but still alive, is possible within certain worldviews,
namely the belief in an afterlife coexisting with the acceptance of permanent physical separation.
This “bricolage” of eclectically pasted together bits and pieces of meaning and practice is in line with
the larger trend in western society where religious blending and the intersection of religious and other
processes are the norm rather than the exception (Bender, Cadge, Levitt, & Smilde, 2013, Mc Guire,
2008). Crucial to the sense making of the PDP experience is that it is not necessarily a cognitive
process. The PDP experience which is sensory and bodily perceived, and which is made sense of in a
such a way that it also embodies cognitive beliefs, often gives a feeling or a sense of a benign order,
which may not be explicitly uttered in a particular belief system.
Theoretically, I consider this multi-voiced sense making as best backed by the Dialogical Self Theory.
DST has a theoretical framework by which to understand how disparate and contrasting positions may
appear in the same self, and further, how different positions can be negotiated. DST further
encompasses voices that are both cognitive and emotional, and also embodied. The meaning making
process can thus consist of entering into dialogue between the different positions, which may result in
changes or adjustments in one or more of the positions, where one position can dominate and bring the
other into silence, or promoter positions may influence and guard the other positions, or third positions
may mediate between two contradictory voices.
This way of conceptualizing dynamics of meaning making is open to different outcomes.
Accordingly, it includes various ways in which sense making through experiencing PDP can take
place. Contrary to a commonly used meaning making model in grief research and in the psychology
of religion, which is proposed by C. Park (2005), and which I briefly touched on in section 9.2, the
DST does not state that the meaning making process will necessarily strive towards congruence among
280
the various beliefs and goals. Although Park’s model is complex158 and illustrates a commonly held
motivational dynamic in the face of adversity, it does not account for a diversity of outcomes. Park’s
model proposes that people will seek consistency in their global and situational meaning in order to
reduce distress and create a more meaningful worldview. When experiencing loss, the situational
meaning (e.g. appraising the loss as terrible) may be incongruent with the global meaning (e.g. the
world is fair and there is a benign order). In order to reduce the dissonance, the bereaved will make
changes in either their global meaning or their situational meaning. The appraised meaning of the
situation can be reinterpreted to be assimilated into one’s pre-existing global meaning, or the global
beliefs and goals can be transformed to accommodate an event that is too traumatic or too aversive, to
fit into pre-existing beliefs159 (Benore & Park, 2004).
In the light of the findings of this present study, I will argue that although this dynamic certainly can
be recognized in most of the cases, it does not capture the possibility that contrasting global beliefs, or
pieces of meaning, can live side by side. When global and situational meaning are seemingly
incongruent (or incongruent to the outside observer), and also when the perceiver strongly struggles
with contradictory elements in their sense making, the solution is not always to change one or the
other (see section 7.1 and 10.1). Here DST introduces the concept of a third position which may
mediate between two conflicting voices. Further, a multiplicity of voices in the global meaning
system can account for flexibility in using some bits and leaving others, according to the situation.
Klass captures the possibility of inconsistency by articulating, as one of his categories of patterns in
worldview accommodation, to “live with a divided self” (see section 3.2 and 9.2). The four other
patterns suggested by Klass160 can, however, be dynamically and motivationally understood as
different ways to transform or accommodate global meaning to match the situational meaning. What
Klass does not articulate so clearly in his categories, however, is the dialogical way in which the (parts
of) worldviews are used together with (parts of) other cultural resources. This may be particularly
striking when encountering an extraordinary experience which has both psychological and religious
meanings as dominant collective voices. Klass certainly claims that worldviews are complex, and that
they may thus encompass different voices from different traditions. He also states that worldviews
seldom are a coherent whole, and that in use they are both cognitive and emotional, while also
158
For instance, does the model capture cognitive beliefs, motives, goals and emotions? It also reflects that people often
have a “sense of meaning” which refers to a feeling of meaningfulness, rather than to a coherent meaning system. It also
reflects the cultural embeddedness of the meaning systems (Park, 2005)
159
This is comparable to Pargament’s (1997) description of the conservation and transformation processes in religious
coping.
160
Which I recapitulate in the following: retain worldview, find new and compelling world-views (adding new elements),
reinterpret symbols in their worldviews, live with a divided self and develop entirely new worldviews (Klass, 1999). See also
281
experiential. However, the dialogical way of sense making is not confronted in the same way as in the
DST.
A dialogical approach to meaning making means that it is possible to have a belief in an afterlife that
accounts for the experiences of PDP, while still, from another position, discussing with a voice that
says this has nothing to do with religion. While Field states that externalized continuing bonds
experiences, which are culturally prescribed and ritually deliberately enacted, can be adaptive (Field
2006), I would argue that PDP can also be adaptive in a culture where it is not usually ritually enacted,
but is experienced individually and spontaneously in a private setting, yet visualized through the
media, where it is both encouraged and discouraged. In a complex cultural context with multiple
voices, there is the possibility of making sense of the experience with the use of existing elements
from a worldview that does not segregate the perceiver from his or her cultural reality. Conflicting
multiple voices, which are part of a globalized self, can create greater distress because the meaning
making process is more complicated to negotiate. However, they also make available different
elements, which when used flexibly can help the perceiver to make sufficient sense of the experience.
Concluding so far: The findings in this dissertation underscore the body of research stating that
continuing bonds which can be made positive sense of, are more likely to be adaptive to growth than
maladaptive. It further contends that this is also the case for the externalized continuing bonds
expressions. I have shown that the meaning making process, in terms of sense making and
significance, is complex, and that there may be different dynamics where worldview and appraised
meaning of the experience are changed or retained, or are in dialogue with one another. Elements of
religious and secular theories can be blended in this process. The important thing is that the perceiver
can make sufficient sense and feel sufficient sense to live on in times of adversity.
12.3.2. Beyond vertical and horizontal meaning making
In an extension of Hermans’ DST, it has been suggested that the dialogue of different I positions can
operate in various spaces, some natural and some supernatural. On the horizontal plane, there are
dialogues with immediate family, and with extended family and community, in both social and
physical space. On a vertical plane, there are dialogues involving relationships with the living dead or
the ancestors, and with God, in what is seen as a “transpersonal space” (Lindegger & Alberts, 2012).
The material in my present study shows that a so-called supernatural experience, the PDP experience,
does not necessarily lie on a vertical dimension for the perceivers. PDP perceptions are not
necessarily experienced and interpreted as a spiritual or religious experience in a “vertical space.”
They can also be interpreted on a “horizontal plane,” transcending ordinary experiences, but still
282
understandable in an immanent frame either as secular spiritual, or just as a secular experience. I have
in the analysis, also shown that the PDP experience can be a blending of both religious and secular
understandings. To put it in DST terminology, it can be a dialogue or a discussion between vertical
and horizontal positions, or a coalition of the vertical and horizontal positions.
As mentioned in section 1.5, the distinction between vertical and horizontal transcendence has recently
been put forward by central actors in the psychology of religion to differentiate between and to
conceptualize spirituality and religion, while still maintaining the common concept of transcendence
(Schnell, 2011; Belzen, 2010). This way of thinking broadens the perspective of what to look for
when studying spirituality and religion, as spiritual expressions that are within an immanent frame are
also a focus of attention. Yet, some experiences do not fall neatly into one or the other category. PDP
is an example of this. PDP experiences are ambiguous and multi-voiced and there will be contextual
differences in their interpretation, both among the perceivers and among the researchers. Perceivers
experience their PDP with or without the vertical dimension, and with and without the understanding
of the experience as transcending, and they use a blending of religious and non-religious interpretive
resources. Different forms of interpretation—religious, spiritual and secular—are also present among
researchers.
12.4 Summary: Experiencing PDP through between and beyond grief and
worldview
Overall, although attachment theories and meaning making models do account for associations
between PDP, religious beliefs, grief and trauma, and the material to a large extent endorses those
associations, the phenomenon also seems to exceed those understandings in that some cases go beyond
the categories and the theoretical conceptualizations. It also goes beyond experiences of grief and the
perceiver’s assumptive worldview. The meaning making process of PDP is complex and it often
intertwines with the meaning making of grief and loss. One of the functions of the PDP experience is
acting as a third position between aspects of worldview and grief when striving for a thread in a life
that has been disrupted. Thus, PDP can be experienced through, between and beyond grief and
worldview.
283
284
PART IV: IMPLICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL
PRACTICE
The last chapter of this thesis will provide some reflections on how best to respond to people with PDP
experiences in professional practice. The reflections are informed by the findings as analyzed and
discussed herein, as well as other relevant studies. However, suggesting prescriptive advice for
clinicians and other people encountering PDP experiences in their professional practice cannot be
directly deduced from these findings as there are many other factors in play in a person’s life that
determine the appropriate response to a PDP experience. This final chapter has been written with that
in mind.
The introductory chapter described some quite strong negative reactions to the practice or experience
of contact with the dead from the Norwegian media debate in 2010. According to the critics, contact
with the dead is “a projection of wishes,” which is “interfering with letting go of the dead,” it “plays
with people’s psychical health,” it “denies the grief and suffering related to death,” and is an
“unhealthy form of religiosity.” The analysis chapters revealed that similar attitudes were encountered
by the participants, although they also received support and encouragement.
In a study by Taylor (2005) in UK investigating counseling experiences of clients who had sensed the
presence of the deceased, she found that 8 out of 10 clients reported that they were dissatisfied with
the way their therapist responded to their experiences. They felt “unaccepted, abnormal, not
understood, unable to connect to counsellors, and that they had received no empathy” (Taylor, 2005:
60). There are, however, reasons to ask if therapists, clergy, and other helpers in western countries
have been more open to PDP experiences in recent years in line with the larger society (Walter, 2009).
If this is the case, perceivers will meet with less resistance than they did some years ago, and perhaps
less resistance than was found by Taylor. The situation may also be different in Norway than in the
UK. However, as the Norwegian media debate demonstrated, and as this analysis has shown, there are
still critical voices among professional practitioners, and the content of their critics is not necessarily
correct. This makes it relevant to give some advices for practice.
285
Thus, based on this study, and supported by a growing body of other research,161 I will provide three
basic recommendations for counseling, whether psychotherapy, mental health practice, coaching,
bereavement groups, spiritual or pastoral care, or other settings where PDP perceivers are encountered.
The recommendations are as follows:
1. To “normalize” the experience.162
2. To explore the experience further and clarify in what ways it is helpful or unhelpful, together
with other processes in the life of the bereaved.163
3. To help with the sense making, be it religious, spiritual, or secular, while holding a respectful
attitude towards the perceiver’s worldview.164
Regarding the first recommendation, one should keep in mind that PDP experiences may be part of a
psychiatric diagnosis. However, as discussed elsewhere in this thesis, in a bereavement context or in
the case of experiencing PDP as an extraordinary perception, this is most often not the case. Thus,
“normalizing” the experience, by telling the perceivers that their perceptions are not pathological, will
probably have therapeutic effects as it helps the perceivers to believe they are not mad. Also in cases
in which the experience is not perceived as welcome or beneficial, associations with mental illness
should generally be avoided (Dateson & Marwit, 1997; Grimby, 1998). A better way is to explore the
negative sides of PDP experiences, whether they encompass a negative relation to the deceased,
difficulties in making sense of the experience, or feelings that the experience is not helping them or is
against their religious conviction. This corresponds to the second recommendation above. If the PDP
experiences are part of a grief process, as discussed in part III, one can explore whether the experience
helps the perceiver in his or her grief process, or whether it occurs in conjunction with processes that
are maladaptive. In the research of the coping aspect of bereavement, Stroebe and her colleagues
have, for instance, provided a now widely used dual process model, which in a simplified short
version, says that bereaved persons can benefit from oscillating between two tracks: one loss oriented
and one restoration oriented. In each track, one again oscillates between positive and negative (re)
appraisal, then giving space to both positive and negative emotions and for both confrontation and
avoidance (Stroebe & Schut, 2001). If, for instance, the PDP experience reinforces one of these tracks
161
The literature on post death presence (PDP) gives a range of practice recommendations. Steffen and Coyle (2012) have
summarized the most common advice when encountering people with PDP experiences in professional practice, which are
fairly similar to the recommendations put forward herein.
162
This advice is also given in the following publications: Berger (1995), Daggett (2005), Dannebaum and Kinnier (2009),
Dateson and Marwit (1997), Grimby (1998), Hayes (2011), Longman et al. (1995), Parker (2005), Rees (1971, 2001), Sanger
(2009), Sormanti and August (1997), Taylor (2005), and Yamomoto et el. (1969).
163
See also Epstein et al. (2006), Sormanti and August (1997), Taylor ( 2005) and Yamomoto et al. (1969).
164
For the importance of helping with sense making, see also Neimeyer et al. (2006) and Parker (2005), and for exploring
spiritual and religious meanings, see Benore and Park (2004) and Steffen and Coyle (2011).
286
over a long period of time, one should ask if the client should be encouraged to enter into another path.
However, as no model encompasses all aspects of life, the grief counseling should always be done in
close cooperation with the bereaved’s own feelings of adaption and his or her worldview. This is
particularly important when using the still accessible voice of the deceased in therapy (Neimeyer,
2012). Regarding the last recommendation, when entering into religious and spiritual explorations,
knowledge of the variety of resources that the perceivers use in order to make sense of their
experiences is crucial. It is also important to consider the general professional practice advice to
engage respectfully with clients’ religious and spiritual worldviews (Pargament, 2007; Steffen &
Coyle, 2012).
Some weeks ago, four years after the media discussion presented in the opening of this dissertation,
the phenomenon of contacting the dead was again in the news. Also this time, the onset was Princess
Märtha Louise, who has now launched a seminar together with the medium Liza Williams. In the
news, a leader of a protestant missionary organization expressed his reaction in an interview stating
that, “This is not a good way to deal with grief” (Dagsrevyen, July 4, 2014).
The comment was probably directed towards medium stage meetings where a large group of people
wait for publicly received messages from the dead, which is a setting one generally should be skeptical
towards as there is usually no follow-up with the perceivers in the crowd. Thus, the statement may not
necessarily refer to the “direct” PDP experiences studied in this thesis. Had it been, however, the
statement would benefit from being reformulated.
This time the missionary leader used the argument of grief. In the last media debate, theological
arguments stating that contacting the dead is against Christian teaching were more in the forefront. As
this thesis is within the psychology of religion discipline, it has discussed how religious ideas are used
as functional resources in sense making and how the participants’ worldview has moved as a result of
the PDP experiences. It has not normatively discussed how the PDP experience corresponds to
(official) teachings in the different religions. This discussion is however suggested for further
research. The present study, as well as the body of research on PDP experiences and their functions,
should then be taken into account. Both protestant theologians that have traditionally discouraged
contact with the deceased and alternative spiritual proponents that have encouraged it, would benefit
from serious reflection regarding the perceivers’ experiences; the large amount of positive valuations,
the negative responses, the adaptive, and the non-adaptive—and all the shades in between. In turn,
this reflection would benefit religious professional practice.
As PDP experiences are rather common, they deserve to be taken seriously in research as well as in
professional practice with the understanding that their high prevalence also indicates a view of
287
“normality” and non-pathology as a rule, rather than as an exception. One of the participants, Siri, can
comment on that issue as a final word in this last chapter.
“I am a completely ordinary person. This is daily fare. This is not something special. And that I will
gladly say to those who bother to listen to it.”
288
References
Afdal, G. (2005). Tolerance and curriculum. Conceptions of tolerance in the multicultural unitary
Norwegian compulsory school (Doctoral thesis). The Norwegian Lutheran School of Theology,
Oslo.
Afdal, G. (2010). Researching Religious Education as Social Praxis. Münster: Waxman Verlag.
Ahlin, L. (2001). New Age: Konsumtionsvara eller värden att kämpa för? Hemmets Journal och
Idagsidan i Svenska Dagbladet analyserande utifrån Mary Douglas gir/group-modell och Pierre
Bourieus feltteori (Thesis). Teologiske institutionen, Lunds universitet, Lund, Sweden.
Alver, B. G. (1999). Det magiske mennesket. Magi som perspektiv for identitetsarbejde og
selvforståelse. In B. G. Alver, I. S. Gilhus, L. Mikaelsson & T. Selberg (Eds.), Myte, magi og
mirakel i møte med det moderne (pp. 147–164). Oslo: Pax Forlag.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th
ed.). Washington: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Amanze, J. N. (2003). Christianity and ancestor veneration in Botswana. Studies in World
Christianity, 9(1), 43–59.
Atkinson, R., Atkinson, R. C., Smith, E. E., & Bem, D. J. (1993). Introduction to psychology (11th
ed.). San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Ayres, L., Kaanaugh, K., & Knafl, K. (2003). Within-Case and across-case approaches to qualitative
data analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 13(1), 871–883.
Belzen, J. A. (2005). In defense of the object: On trends and directions in psychology of religion.
International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 15(1), 1–16.
Belzen, J. A. (2009). Studying the specificity of spirituality: lessons from the psychology of religion.
Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 12(3), 205–222.
Belzen, J. A. (2010). Towards cultural psychology of religion. Principles, approaches, applications.
New York: Springer.
Belzen, J. A., & Hood Jr., R. W. (2006). Methodological issues in the psychology of religion: toward
another paradigm? The Journal of Psychology, 140(1), 5–28.
Bender, C., Cadge, W., Levitt, P., & Smilde, D. (Eds.). (2013). Religion on the edge. De-centering and
re-centering the sociology of religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bennet, G., & Bennet, K. M. (2000). The presence of the dead: an empirical study. Mortality, 5, 139–
157.
Benore, E. R., & Park, C. (2004). Death-specific religious beliefs and bereavement: Belief in an
afterlife and continued attachment. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 14(1),
1–22.
289
Bentall, R. P. (2000) Hallucinatory Experiences. In E. Cardeña, S. J. Lynn & S. Krippner (Eds.),
Varieties of anomalous experience. Examining the scientific evidence (pp. 85–120). Washington
DC: American Psychological Association.
Berenbaum, H., Kerns, J., & Ragahvan, C. (2000). Anomalous experiences, peculiarity and
psychopathology. In E. Cardenã, S. J. Lynn & S. Krippner (Eds.), Varieties of Anomalous
Experience (pp. 25–46). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Berger, A. S. (1995). Quoth the raven: Bereavement and the paranormal. Omega: Journal of Death
and Dying, 31, 1–10.
Bernstein, R. J. (1983). Beyond objectivism and relativism: science, hermeneutics, and praxis.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Boelen, P. A., Stroebe, M. S., Schut, H. A. W., & Zijerveld, A. M. (2006). Continuing bonds and
grief: A prospective analysis. Death Studies, 30(8), 767–776.
Botvar, P. K. (2007). Why New Age is giving way to spirituality. The silent revolution within
alternative religiosity. In I. Furseth & P. L. Salvesen (Eds.), Religion in Late Modernity. Essays in
Honor of Pål Repstad (pp. 87–100). Trondheim: Tapir Akademiske forlag.
Botvar, P. K. (2009). Skjebnetro, selvutvikling og samfunnsengasjement. Den politiske betydningen av
ulike former for religiøsitet blant norske velgere (Doctoral thesis). The University of Oslo, Oslo.
Botvar, P. K. (2010). Endringer i nordmenns religiøse liv. In P. K. Botvar & U. Schmidt (Eds.),
Religion i dagens Norge. Mellom sekularisering og sakralisering. (pp. 11-24). Oslo:
Universitetsforlaget.
Botvar, P. K., & Henriksen, J. O. (2010). Mot en alternativreligiøs revolusjon? In P. K. Botvar & U.
Schmidt (Eds.), Religion i dagens Norge. Mellom sekularisering og sakralisering. (pp. 60-80).
Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss. Vol. 3: Loss. London: Hogarth.
Bøyum, B. (1992). Holdninger til religion 1991. Gjennomføring og datainnsamling. Rapport nr. 92.
Norsk samfunnsvitenskapelig datatjeneste.Braud, W. (2012). Health and well-being benefits of
exceptional human experiences. In C. Murray (Ed.), Mental Health and Anomalous Experience
(pp. 107–124). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cardeña, E. Lynn, S.J. & Krippner, S.(2000). Introduction: Anomalous experiences in perspective. In
E. Cardenã, S. J. Lynn & S. Krippner (Eds.), Varieties of Anomalous Experience (pp. 25–46).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Chan, C. L., Chow, A. Y., Ho, S. M., Tsui, Y. K., Tin, A. F., Koo, B. W. K., & Koo, E. W. K. (2005)
The experience of Chinese bereaved persons: A preliminary study of meaning making and
continuing bonds. Death Studies, 29, 923–947.
Conant, R. D. (1996). Memories of the life and death of a spouse: The role of images and sense of
presence in grief. In D. Klass, P. R. Silverman & S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing bonds: new
understandings of grief (pp. 179–196). Washington: Taylor & Francis.
290
Coyle, A., & Lyons, E. (Eds.). (2007). Analysing qualitative data in psychology. London: Sage
Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Los
Angeles: Sage Publications.
Daggett, L. M. (2005). Continued encounters: The experience of after-death communication. Journal
of Holistic Nursing, 23(2), 191–207.
Danbolt, L. J. (2014). Hva er religionspsykologi? Begrepsavklaringer i en nordisk kontekst. In L. J.
Danbolt, L. G. Engedal, H. Stifoss-Hanssen, K. Hestad & L. Lien (Eds.), Religionspsykologi (pp.
17–31). Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.
Dannebaum, S. M., & Kinnier, R. T. (2009). Imaginal relationships with the dead: Applications for
psychotherapy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 49, 100–113.
Dateson, S. L., & Mariwit, S. J. (1997). Personality constructs and perceived presence of deceased
loved ones. Death Studies, 21, 131–146.
Davis, C. G., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Larson, J. (1998). Making sense of loss and benefiting from the
experience: two construals of meaning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 561–
574.
De Vaus, D. (2001). Research design in social research. London: Sage Publications.
DeMarinis, V. (2008). The impact of postmodernization on existential health in Sweden: Psychology
of religion’s function in existential public health analysis. Archive for the Psychology of Religion,
30, 57–74.
DeMarinis, V. (2013). Existential meaning-making and ritualizing for understanding mental health
function in cultural context. In H. Westerink (Ed.), Constructs of meaning and religious
transformation: current issues in the psychology of religion (pp. 207–222). Göttingen: V & R
Unipress.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.).
London: Sage Publications.
Dimaggio, G., Hermans, H. J. M., & Lysaker, P. H. (2010). Health and adaptation in a multiple self.
Theory & Psychology, 20(3), 379–399.
Døving, C. A., & Kraft, S. E. (2013). Religion i pressen. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Duppils, S. K. (2010). Hemsökta plaster?: en religionspykologisk tolkning av platsbunden
entitetkontinuitet. Uppsala: Swedish Science Press.
Dyregrov. A. (2006). Komplisert sorg: teori og behandling. Tidsskrift for norsk psykologforening, 43,
779–786.
Eathough, V., & Smith, J. A. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In W. Stainton-Rogers
& C. Willig (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology (pp. 179–194).
London: Sage Publications.
Endsjø, D., & Lied, L. I. (2011). Det folk vil ha. Religion og populærkultur. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
291
Engelstad, F. (2003). Kunnskap, makt og normer i sammfunnsvitenskapene. In K. Reuter (Ed.),
Forskningsetikk. (pp. 215-241). Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk.
Epstein, R., Kalusz, C., & Berger, M. (2006). The continuing bonds of the bereaved towards the
deceased and adjustment to loss. Mortality, 11, 254–268.
Fairbarn, W. R. D. (1952). Psycho-analytic studies of the personality. Tavistock, London: Basic
Books.
Field, N. P. (2006). Unresolved grief and continuing bonds: an attachment perspective. Death Studies,
30, 739–756.
Field, N. P. (2008). Whether to relinquish or maintain a bond with the deceased. In M. S. Stroebe, R.
O. Hansson, H. Schut & W. Stroebe (Eds.), Handbook of bereavement research and practice:
advances in theory and intervention (pp. 113–132). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Field, N. P., & Filanosky, C. (2010). Continuing bonds, risk factors for complicated grief and
adjustment to bereavement. Death Studies, 34(1), 1–29.
Field, N. P., Gal-Oz, E., & Bonnano, G. A. (2003). Continuing bonds in adjustment at 5 years after the
death of a spouse. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 110–117.
Field, N. P., Gao, B., & Paderna, L. (2005). The continuing bonds in bereavement: An attachment
theory based perspective. Death Studies, 29, 277–299.
Field, N. P., & Friedrichs, M. (2004). Continuing bonds in coping with the death of a husband. Death
Studies, 28, 597–620.
Field, N. P., Nichols, C., Holen, A., & Horowitz, M. (1999). The relation of continuing attachment to
adjustment in conjugal bereavement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 212–218.
Finuance, R. C. (1996). Ghosts, appearances of the dead and cultural transformation. Amherst, N.Y:
Promethus Books.
Flowers, P. (2008). Temporal tales: The use of multiple interviews with the same participant.
Qualitative Methods in Psychology, 5, 24–27.
Freud, S. (1913/2001). Totem and taboo: some points of agreement between the metal lives of savages
and neurotics. London: Routledge
Freud, S. (1917/2009). Mourning and melancholia. In L. G. Fiorini, T. Bokanowski & S. Lewkowicz
(Eds.), On Freud’s “mourning and melancholia” Contemporary Freud (pp. 19–34, 243–258). The
International Psychoanalytic Association. London: Karnac Books.
Gadamer, H. (1960/1990). Truth and method (2nd ed.). New York: Crossroad
Ganzevoort, R. R., & Falkenburg, N. (2012). Stories beyond life and death: Spiritual experiences of
continuity and discontinuity among parents who lose a child. Journal of Empirical Theology, 25,
1–16.
Giddens, A. (2003). Social Science as double hermeneutic. In G. Delanty & P. Stydom (Eds.),
Philosophies of Social Science. The classic and contemporary readings. (pp. 400-404). Mainhead:
Open University Press.
292
Gilhus, I. S. (2012). Post-secular religion and the therapeutic turn: three Norwegian examples. In T.
Ahlbäck & B. Dahla (Eds.), Post-secular religious practices (pp. 62–75). Åbo: Donner Insititute
for Research in Religious and Cultural History.
Gilhus, I. S., & Mikaelsson, L. (2000). Multireligiøse aktører og kulturens refortrylling. Sosiologi i
dag, 30(2), 5–22.
Gillies, J., & Neimeyer, R. A. (2006). Loss, grief and the search for significance: Toward a model of
meaning reconstruction in bereavement. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 19, 31–65.
Giorgi, A. (1997). The theory, practice and evaluation of the phenomenological method as a
qualitative research procedure. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 28, 235–260.
Giorgi, A. P., & Giorgi, B. (2008). Phenomenological psychology. In C. Willig & W. Stainton- Rogers
(Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology (pp. 165–178). London: Sage
Publications.
Glick, I. O., Weiss, R. S., & Parkes, C. M. (1974). The first year of bereavement. New York: Wiley.
Greeley, A. M. (1987). Mysticism goes mainstream. American Health, 6, 47–49.
Greeley, A. M. (1989). Religious change in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Grimby, A. (1998). Hallucinations following the loss of a spouse: common and normal events among
the elderly. Journal of Clinical Geropsychology, 4, 65–74.
Guoqing, M. (2004). The ancestors' drawing power. Chinese Sociology & Anthropology, 37(2/3), 53–
73.
Hanegraaff, W. J. (1998). New Age Religion and Western Cultlure. Esotericism in the Mirror of
Secular Thought. New York: State University.
Haraldsson, E. (1985). Representative national surveys of psychic phenomena: Iceland, Great Britain,
Sweden, USA and Gallup’ Multinational Survey. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research,
53, 145–158.
Haraldsson, E. (2009). Alleged encounters with the dead: the importance of violent death in 337 new
cases. The Journal of Parapsychology, 73, 91–118.
Haraldsson, E. (2011). Psychic experiences a third of a century. Journal of the Society for Psychical
Research, 75, 76–91.
Haraldsson, E., & Houtkooper, J. M. (1991). Psychic experiences in the multinational human value
study: who reports them? Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 85, 145–165.
Harvard University. (2006). Harvard Mental Health Letter. Retrieved from
http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Mental_Health_Letter/2006/October
Hayes, J. (2011). Experiencing the presence of the deceased: symptoms, spirits or ordinary life?
(Doctoral thesis). The University of Manchester, Manchester.
Heelas, P. (1998). Introduction: On differentiation and dedifferentiation. In P. Heelas (Ed.), Religion,
modernity and postmodernity (pp. 1–18). London: Blackwell.
293
Heelas, P., & Woodhead, L. (2005). The Spiritual Revolution. Why religion is giving way to
spirituality. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.
Heidegger, M. (1962/2004). Being and time. (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford:
Blackwell.
Henriksen, J.-O. (2005). Spirituality and religion—worlds apart? Heelas’ and Woodhead’s The
spiritual revolution read as a resource for cultural and theological critisism. Tidsskrift for kirke,
religion, samfunn, 18(1), 73–88.
Henriksen, J.-O., & Christoffersen, S. A. (2010). Religionens livstolkning: Innføring i kristendommens
religionsfilosofi. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Henriksen, J.-O., & Pabst, K. (2013). Uventet og ubedt. Paranormale erfaringer i møte med
tradisjonell tro. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Hermans, J. H. M. (1996). Voicing the self: From information processing to dialogical interchange.
Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 31–50.
Hermans, H. J. M. (2004). The dialogical self. Between exchange and power. In H. J. M. Hermans &
G. Dimaggio (Eds.), The Dialogical Self in Psychotherapy (pp. 13–28). New York: Brunner
Routledge.
Hermans, H. J. M. (2012). Between Dreaming and Recognition. The emergence of Dialogical self
theory. Maryland: University Press.
Hermans, H. J. M., & Gieser, T. (2012). Introductory chapter: history, main tenets and core concepts
of dialogical self theory. In H. J. M. Hermans & T. Gieser (Eds.), Handbook of Dialogical Self
Theory (pp. 1–22). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hermans, H. J. M., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1993). The Dialogical Self. Meaning as Movement. San
Diego: Academic Press.
Hermans, H. J. M., & Hermans-Konopka, A. (2010). Dialogical Self Theory. Positioning and Counter
Positioning in a Globalizing Society. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hermans, H. J. M., & Dimaggio, G. (2007). Self, Identity and Globalization in Times of Uncertainty:
A Dialogical Analysis. Review of General Psychology, 11(1), 31–61.
Hermans, H. J. M., Kempen, H. J. G., & van Loon, R. (1992). The Dialogical Self. Beyond
Individualism and Rationalism. American Psychologist, 47(1), 23–33.
Hermans, H. J. M., Rijks, T. I., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1993). Imaginal dialogues in the self: Theory and
method. Journal of Personality, 61(2), 207–236.
Hill, P. C., Pargament, K. II., Hood, J. R. W., McCullough, M. E., Swyers, J. P., Larson, D. B., &
Zinnbauer, B. J. (2000). Conceptualizing religion and spirituality: Points of commonality, points of
departure. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 30(1), 51–77.
Holland, J. M., Currier, J. M., & Neimeyer, R. A. (2006). Meaning reconstruction in the first two years
of bereavement: The role of sense making and benefit finding. Omega: Journal of Death & Dying,
53(3), 175–191.
294
Holt, N., Bremner, A., Sutherland, E., Vliek, M., Passer, M., & Smith, R. (2012). Psychology: the
science of mind and behavior. London: McGraw- Hill
Hood Jr., R.W. (2003). Conceptual and empirical consequences of the unity thesis. In J. Belzen & A.
Geels (Eds.), Mysticism. A variety of psychological perspective (pp. 17–54). New York: Rodopi.
Hood Jr., R.W. (2005). Mystical, spiritual, and religious experiences. In R. F. Paloutzioan & C. L.
Park (Eds.), Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality (pp. 348–364). New York:
The Guilford Press.
Hood Jr., R.W. (2012). Commentary to the special issue of the archive for the psychology of religion
on “spirituality”. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 34, 105–111.
Hood Jr., R. W., Hill, P. C., & Spilka, B. (2009). The psychology of religion. An empirical approach
(4th ed.). New York/London: The Guilford Press.
Hovi, T. (2012). Clinical services instead of sermons. In T. Ahlbäck & B. Dahla (Eds.), Post-secular
religious practices (pp. 62–75). Åbo: Donner Institute for Research in Religious and Cultural
History.
Husserl. (1982). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy (F.
Kersten, trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Irwin, H. J., & Watt, C. A. (2007). An Introduction to parapsychology (5th ed.). North Carolina:
McFairland & Company.
Jablensky, A. (1995). Schizophrenia: The epidemiological horizon. In S. H. Hirsch & D. R.
Weinberger (Eds.), Schizophrenia (pp. 206–252). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
James, W. (1890/1923). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.
James, W. (1902/2010). The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. New York:
Classic Books International.
Janoff-Bulman, R., & Frantz, C. (1997). The impact of trauma on meaning: From meaningless world
to meaningful life. In M. Power & C. Brewin (Eds.), The transformation of meaning in
psychological therapies (pp. 91–106). New York: Wiley.
Kalish, R. A., & Reynolds, D. K. (1973). Phenomenological reality and post-death contact. Journal for
the Scientific Study of Religion, 12(2), 209–221.
Kalvig, A. (2012). Seansar og minnet om dei døde. Kirke og kultur, 117(2), 128–142.
Kalvig, A. (2013). Dødekontakt i Rogaland. Kirke og Kultur, 118(2), 132–145.
Keen, C., Murray, C. D., & Payne, S. (2013). A qualitative exploration of sensing the presence of the
deceased following bereavement. Mortality, 18(4), 339–357.
Keese, N. J., Currier, J. M., & Neimeyer, R.A. (2008). Predictors of grief following the death of one’s
child: the contribution of finding meaning. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64, 1145–1163.
Klass, D. (1992). The inner representation of the dead child and the worldviews of bereaved parents.
Journal of Death and Dying, 26(4), 255–272.
295
Klass, D. (1996b). Grief in an Eastern Culture: Japanese Ancestor Worship. In D. Klass, P. R.
Silverman, & S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing Bonds: New Understandings of Grief (pp. 59–70).
Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
Klass, D. (1998). Parental Grief: Solace and Resolution. New York: Springer.
Klass, D. (1999). The spiritual lives of bereaved parents. Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.
Klass, D. (2006a). Grief, religion and spirituality. In K. Garces-Foly (Ed.), Death and Religion in a
Changing World (pp. 283–304). New York: M. E. Sharpe.
Klass, D. (2006b). Continuing conversation about continuing bonds. Death Studies, 30, 843–858.
Klass, D., Silverman, P. R, & Nickman, S. (Eds.). (1996). Continuing bonds: new understandings of
grief. Bristol, UK: Taylor & Francis.
Klass, D., & Walter, T. (2001). Processes of grieving: How bonds are continued. In M. S. Stroebe, W.
Stroebe, R. O. Hansson & H. Schut (Eds.), Handbook of bereavement research: consequences,
coping and care (p. 431–448). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Klugman, G. M. (2006). Dead men talking: evidence of post death contact and continuing bonds.
Omega, 53, 249–262.
Kosslyn, S. M., & Rosenberg, R. S. (2011). Introducing psychology: brain, person, group (4th ed.).
Boston: Pearson.
Kraft, S. E. (2011). Hva er nyreligiøsitet? Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Krause, N. (2011). Reported contact with the dead, religious involvement, and death anxiety in late
life. Review of Religious Research, 52(4), 347–364.
Krause, N., & Bastida, E. (2012). Contact with the dead, religion, and death anxiety among older
Mexican Americans. Death Studies, 36(10), 932–948.
Kvale, S. (1997). Det kvalitative forskningsintervju. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, R. (2009). Interviews. Learning the craft of qualitative research
interviewing. London: Sage Publications.
Kwilecki, S. (2009). Twenty-first century American ghosts: the after-death communication- therapy
and revelation from beyond the grave. Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation,
19(1), 101–133.
Kwilecki, S. (2011). Ghosts, meaning, and faith: after death communications in bereavement
narratives. Death Studies, 35, 219–243.
LaCour, P., & Hvidt, N. C. (2010). Research on meaning-making and health in secular society:
Secular, spiritual and religious existential orientations. Social Science & Medicine, 71(7), 1292–
1299.
Laugerud, T. (2012). Sjelens udødelighet og forholdet til de døde – et spiritualitetsperspektiv.
Tidsskrift for sjelesorg, 32(2), 84–100.
296
Leudar, I., & Thomas, P. (2000). Voices of reason, voices of insanity. Studies of verbal hallucinations.
London: Routledge.
Lichtenthal, W. G., Currier, J. M., Neimeyer, R. A., & Keesee, N. J. (2010). Sense and significance: A
mixed methods examination of meaning making after the loss of one’s child. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 66, 791–812.
Lindegger, G., & Alberts, C. (2012). The dialogical self in the new South Africa. In H. J. M. Hermans
& T. Gieser (Eds.), Handbook of Dialogical Self Theory (pp. 215–234). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Lindstrøm, T. C. (1995). Experiencing the presence of the dead: Discrepancies in “the sensing
experience” and their psychological concomitants. Omega: Journal of Death & Dying, 31(1).
Longman, A. J., Lindstrom, B., & Clark, M. (1988). Sensory-perceptual experiences of bereaved
individuals. The American Journal of Hospice Care, 5, 43–45.
Lund, M. (1999). Undersøkelse om religion 1998. Rapport nr. 115. Norsk samfunnsvitenskapelig
datatjeneste.
Lunestad, L. (2000). Folketro i Nord-Norge. In L. G. Engedal & A. T. Sveinall (Eds.), Troen er løs.
Bidrag til belysning av forholdet mellom folkereligiøsitet, nyreligiøsitet og kristen tro. (pp. 177190). Trondheim: Tapir Akademisk Forlag.
Lysaker, P. H., & Hermans, H. J. M. (2007). The dialogical self in psychotherapy for persons with
schizophrenia: A case study. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63(2), 129–139.
MacDonald, W. L. (1992). Idionecrophanies: the social construction of perceived contact with the
dead. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 31(2), 215–223.
Marwit, S. J., & Klass, D. (1996). Grief and the role of the inner representation of the deceased. In D.
Klass, P. R. Silverman & S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing Bonds: New Understandings of Grief
(pp. 297–310). Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
McClenon, J. (1990). Chinese and American anomalous experiences: the role of religiosity.
Sociological Analysis, 51(1), 53–67.
McClenon, J. (1993). Surveys of anomalous experience in Chinese, Japanese, and American samples.
Sociology of Religion, 54(3), 295–302.
McGuire, M. B. (2008). Lived religion. Faith and practice in everyday life. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Mdende, N. (2005). Ancestors and healing in African religion: as South African context. In I.
Wulfhorst (Ed.), Ancestors, spirits and healing in Africa and Asia: A challenge to the church. (pp.
13-24). Geneva: The Lutheran World Federation.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mehren, T. M. (1999). Norsk selskap for psykisk forskning. Mellom vitenskap og okkultisme
(Umpublished master’s thesis). University of Oslo, Oslo.
Mehren, T. M. (2011). Engler – mer enn en rapport fra jenterommet? Kvinner og spiritisme i Norge.
Kirke og kultur, 116(2), 114–133.
297
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. An Expanded Sourcebook.
London: Sage Publications.
Morse, J. M., Barret, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verifications strategies for
establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 1(2), 13–22.
Mortensen, A. K. (2010). Undersøkelse om religion 2008. Rapport nr. 126. Norsk
samfunnsvitenskapelig datatjeneste.
Neimeyer, R. A., Baldwin, S. A., & Gillies, J. (2006). Continuing bonds and reconstructing meaning:
Mitigating complications in bereavement. Death Studies, 30(8), 715–738.
Neimeyer, R. A. (2000). Searching for the meaning of meaning: Grief therapy and the process of
reconstruction. Death Studies, 24, 541–558.
Neimeyer, R. A., Prigerson, H. G., & Davies, B. (2002). Mourning and meaning. American Behavioral
Scientist, 46, 235–251.
Neimeyer, R. A. (2012). Reconstructing the self in the wake of loss: a dialogical contribution. In H. J.
M. Hermans & T. Gieser (Eds.), Handbook of Dialogical Self Theory. (pp. 374- 389). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Nowatzki, N. R., & Kalischuk, R. G. (2009). Post-death encounters: Grieving, mourning, and healing.
Omega: Journal of Death & Dying, 59(2), 91–111.
Olson, P. R., Suddeth, J. A., Peterson, P. J., & Egelhoff, C. (1985). Hallucinations of widowhood.
Journal of the American Geriatric Society, 33, 543–547.
Pargament, K. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping – theory, research, practice. New York:
The Guilford Press.
Pargament, K. (2007). Spiritually integrated psychotherapy. Understanding and addressing the
sacred. New York & London: The Guilford Press.
Park, C. L. (2005). Religion and meaning. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the
psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 21–43). New York: Guilford Press.
Parkes, C. M. (1972). Bereavement: Studies of grief in adult life. New York: International Universities
Press.
Parkes, C. M., & Brown, R. J. (1972). Health after bereavement: A controlled study of young Boston
widows and widowers. Psychosomatic Medicine, 34(5), 449–461.
Parkes, C. M., & Prigerson, H. G. (2010). Bereavement: studies of grief in adult life (4th ed.). London
and New York: Routledge.
Parker, J. E. (2005). Extraordinary experiences of the bereaved and adaptive outcomes of grief.
Omega, 5(4), 257–283.
Parra, A. (2006). Seeing and feeling ghosts: Absorption, fantasy, proneness, and healthy schizotypy as
predictors of crisis apparition experiences. Journal of parapsychology, 70, 357–372.
298
Passer, M. W., & Smith, R. E. (2011). Psychology. The science of mind and behavior. Boston.
McGraw-Hill.
Perez, E. (2011). Spiritist mediumship as historical mediation: African-American pasts, black
ancestral presence and Afro-Cuban religions. Journal of Religion in Africa, 41, 330–365.
Pierre, J. M. (2010). Hallucinations in nonpsychotic disorders. Toward a differential diagnosis of
“hearing voices.” Harvard Review Psychiatry, 18(1), 22–35.
Pringle, J., Drummond, J., McLafferty, E., & Hendry, C. (2011). Interpretative phenomenological
analysis: a discussion and critique. Nurse Researcher, 18(3), 20–24.
Rees, D. (1971). The hallucinations of widowhood. British Medical Journal, 4, 37–41.
Rees, D. (2001). Death and bereavement: the psychological, religious and cultural interfaces (2nd
ed.). London: Whurr.
Reuter, K. (2003). Forskningsetikkens spede begynnelse og tilblivelse: beskyttelse av enkeltpersoner
og samfunn. In K. Reuter (Ed.), Forskningsetikk. (pp. 17-38). Oslo: Gyldendal akademisk
Rizzuto, A.-M. (1979). The birth of the living god: a psychoanalytic study. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Rizzuto, A.-M. (1974). Object relations and the formation of the image of God. British Journal of
Medical Psychology, 47, 83–99.
Romarheim, A. (2004a). Spiritisme som utfordring for de lutherske kirker. Norsk tidsskrift for misjon,
2, 67–73.
Romarheim, A. (2004b). Åndenes makt. Folkelige forstillinger om hus hjemsøkt av ånder – og kirkens
rolle. Halvårsskrift for praktisk teologi, 2, 6–69.
Romarheim, A. (2007). Behöver vi en spökteologi. Tidskriften NOD,1, 22-27.
Romarheim, A. (2008). The return of the spirits: reflections on “transmodernity” in today's Northern
Europe with special regard to the situation in Norway. In K. O. Sannes, G. E. Hagen, T. Hegertun,
K. Jørgensen, K. Norseth & R. Olsen, Med Kristus til jordens ender: festskrift til Tormod
Engelsviken (pp. 291–299). Trondheim: Tapir Akademisk Forlag.
Romarheim, A. (2011). Nyåndelig folkereligiøsitet? En drøfting av alternativreligiøsitetens plass I
dagens samfunn, med særlig vekt på endringer I gudsbegrep og åndetro. In T. Engelsviken, R.
Olsen & N. Thelle, Nye guder for hvermann? Femti år med alternativ spiritualitet (pp. 41–59).
Trondheim: Tapir Akademisk Forlag.
Romarheim, A. (2014). [Norwegian weekly press (“illustriertes”). Religious articles in the family
journals “Hjemmet, “Allers” and “Norsk Ukeblad”]. Unpublished raw data.
Rowan, J. (2012). The use of I-positions in psychotherapy. In H. J. M. Hermans & T. Gieser (Eds.),
Handbook of Dialogical Self Theory. (pp. 341-351). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Salgado, J., & Hermans, H. J. M. (2005). The return of subjectivity: From a multiplicity of selves to
the dialogical self. E-Journal of Applied Psychology, 1, 3–13.
299
Samuel, W. J. (2005). The inclusiveness and exclusiveness of the gospel of Christ in the light of the
many Asian spiritualities. In I. Wulfhorst (Ed.), Ancestors, spirits and healing in Africa and Asia: A
challenge to the church. (pp. 145-152). Geneva: The Lutheran World Federation.
Sanger, M. (2009). When clients sense the presence of lived ones who have died. Omega: Journal of
Death & Dying, 59, 69–89.
Sarbin, T. R. (1986). The narrative as a root metaphor for psychology. In T. R. Sarbin (Ed.), Narrative
Psychology: The storied nature of human conduct (pp. 3–21). New York: Praeger.
Sarbin, T. R. (1989). Emotions as narrative employments. In M. J. Packer & R. B. Addison (Eds.),
Entering the circle: Hermeneutic investigation in psychology (pp. 185–201). Albany, NY: Suny
Press.
Schnell, T. (2003). A framework for the study of implicit religion: the psychological theory of implicit
religiosity. Implicit religion, 6(2-3), 86–104.
Schnell, T. (2011). Experiential validity: Psychological approaches to the sacred. Implicit religion,
14(4), 388–404.
Schnell, T., & Keenan, W. J. (2011). Meaning-making in an atheist world. Archive for the psychology
of religion, 55–77.
Schnell, T., & Keenan, W. J. (2013). The construction of atheist spirituality: a survey based study. In
H. Westerink (Ed.), Constructs of meaning and religious transformation. Current issues in the
psychology of religion (pp. 101–118). Göttingen: Vienna University Press.
Schucher, S. R., & Zisook, S. (1993). The course of normal grief. In M. S. Stroebe, W. Stroebe & R.
O. Hansson (Eds.), Handbook of bereavement: theory, research and intervention (pp. 23–43).
Cambridge: UK Cambridge University Press.
Schut, H. A. W., Stroebe, M. S., Boelen, P. A., & Zijerveld, A. M. (2006). Continuing Relationships
with the Deceased: Disentangling Bonds and Grief. Death Studies, 30(8), 757–766.
Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y.
S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 189–214). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Selberg, T. (2011). Folkelig religiøsitet. Et kulturvitenskapelig perspektiv. Oslo: Spartacus
Silverman, P. R., & Klass, D. (1996). Introduction: What’s the problem? In D. Klass, P. R. Silverman,
& S. L. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing Bonds: New Understandings of Grief (pp. 3–23). Washington,
DC: Taylor & Francis.
Silvermann, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analyzing talk, text and interaction.
London: Sage Publications.
Simon-Buller, S., Christopherson, V.A., & Jones, R.A. (1988-89). Correlates of sensing the presence
of a deceased spouse. Omega. Journal of Death and Dying, 19, 21–30.
Sky, J. (2013). Erfaring og opplevelse. Prosa, 3.
Smith, J. A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its
contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1, 39–54.
300
Smith, J. A. (1996). Beyond the divide between cognition and discourse: Using interpretative
phenomenological analysis in health psychology. Psychology & Health, 11, 261–271.
Smith, J. A., & Eathough, V. Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In E. Lyons & A. Coyle
(Eds.), Analysing Qualitative Data in Psychology. (pp. 35-50). London: Sage Publications.
Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, Theory,
Method and Research. London: Sage Publications.
Sormanti, M., & August, J. (1997). Parental bereavement: Spiritual connections with deceased
children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 460–469.
Spinelli, E. (1989). The interpreted world. An introduction to phenomenological psychology. London:
Sage Publications.
Steffen, E., & Coyle, A. (2010). Can sense of presence experiences in bereavement be conceptualized
as spiritual phenomena? Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 13(3), 273–291.
Steffen, E., & Coyle, A. (2011). Sense of presence experiences and meaning-making in bereavement:
a qualitative analysis. Death Studies, 35, 576–609.
Steffen, E., & Coyle, A. (2012). “Sense of presence” experiences in bereavement and their relationship
to mental health: a critical examination of a continuing controversy. In C. Murray (Ed.), Mental
health and anomalous experience. (pp.33-56). New York: Nova Science Publishers
Stifoss-Hanssen, H. (1999). Religion and spirituality: what a European ear hears. The International
Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 9(1), 25–33.
Storey, L. (2007). Doing Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. In E. Lyons & A. Coyle (Eds.),
Analysing Qualitative Data in Psychology. (pp. 51-64). London: Sage Publications.
Stroebe, M. (1997). From mourning and melancholia to bereavement and biography: an assessment of
Walter’s New Model of Grief. Mortality, 2(3), 255–262.
Stroebe, M. S., & Schut, H. (2001). Models of coping with bereavement: a review. In M. S. Stroebe,
W. Stroebe, R. O. Hansson & H. Shut (Eds.), Handbook of bereavement research: consequences,
coping and care (pp. 431–448). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Stroebe, M. S., Stroebe, W., Hansson, H. O., & Shut, H. (2001). Introduction: concepts and issues in
contemporary research on bereavement. In M. S. Stroebe, W. Stroebe, R. O. Hansson & H. Shut
(Eds.), Handbook of bereavement research: consequences, coping and care (pp. 431–448).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sundermeier, T. (2004). Spiritism: a theological and pastoral challenge. In I. Wulfhorst (Ed.).
Spiritualism: a challenge to the churches in Europe. (pp. 61-78). Geneva: The Lutheran World
Federation.
Taylor, C. (1995). The dialogical self. In R. F. Goodman & W. F. Fisher (Eds.), Rethinking
Knowledge. (pp.57-66). New York: State University Press.
Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
301
Taylor, S. F. (2005). Between the idea and the reality: A study of the counseling experience of
bereaved people who sense the presence of the deceased. Counselling and Psychotherapy
Research, 5, 53–61.
Teigen, K. H. (2004). En psykologihistorie. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
Thomas, K. (1991). Religion and the Decline of magic: Studies in popular beliefs in sixteenth- and
seventeenth- century England. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Tien, A. Y. (1991). Distribution of hallucinations in the population. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric
Epidemology, 26, 287–292.
Tyson-Rawson, K. (1996). Relationship and heritage: Manifestations of ongoing attachment following
father death. In D. Klass, P. R. Silvermann & S. Nickman (Eds.), Continuing Bonds: New
Understandings of Grief (pp. 125–145). Bristol: Taylor & Francis.
Van Manen, M. (2003). Reaching lived experience. London, Ontario: Althouse.
Visendi. (2007). Gallupundersøkelse gjennom Visendi. Oslo: Kristelig Pressekontor.
Wagner-Rau, U. (2004). Contact with the deceased: spiritualistic forms of religion and processes of
mourning. In I. Wulfhorst (Ed.), Spiritualism: a challenge to the churches in Europe. (pp. 91-102).
Geneva: The Lutheran World Federation
Walter, T. (1994). The revival of death. London: Routledge.
Walter, T. (1996) A new model of grief: bereavement and biography. Mortality, 1(1), 7–25.
Walter, T. (1997). Letting go and keeping hold: a reply to Stroebe. Mortality, 2(3), 263–266.
Walter, T. (1999). On bereavement. The culture of grief. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Walter, T. (2007). Mediums and mourners. Theology, 110(854), 92–100.
Walter, T. (2009). Communicating with the dead. In C. Bryant & D. Peck (Eds.), Encyclopedia of
Death and the Human Experience (pp. 216–219). London: Sage Publications.
Weiss, R. A. (2001). Grief, bonds and relationships. In M. S. Stroebe, W. Stroebe, R. O. Hansson & H.
Schut (Eds.), Handbook of bereavement research: consequences, coping and care (pp. 431–448).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Westerink, H. (2012). Spirituality in psychology of religion: A concept on search of its meaning.
Archiv fur Religionspsychologie/Archive for the Psychology of Religions, 34(1), 3–15.
Westerink, H. (2013). Introduction: religious and spiritual constructs of meaning and transformation.
In H. Westerink (Ed.), Constructs of meaning and religious transformation: current issues in the
psychology of religion (pp. 9–20). Göttingen: V&R Unipress.
White, R. A. (1997). Dissociation, narrative and exceptional human experience. In S. Krippner & S.
Powers (Eds.), Broken images, broken selves: Dissociative narratives in clinical practice (pp. 88–
121). Washington DC: Bruner-Mazel.
302
White, R. A., & Braun, S. V. (1998). Classes of EE/EHE. In R. A. White (Ed.), Exceptional human
experience: Special issues, background and papers II. The EHE network, 1995-1998: Progress and
possibilities (pp. 43–45). New Bern: The Exceptional Human Experience Network.
Willig, C., & Stainton-Rogers, W. (Eds.) (2008). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in
Psychology. London: Sage Publications.
Willig, C., & Stainton-Rogers, W. (Eds.) (2008). Introduction. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers
(Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology. (pp. 1-12). London: Sage
Publications.
Winnicott, D. (1953). Transitional objects and transitional phenomena. International Journal of
Psycho-Analysis, 34, 89–97.
Winnicott, D. (1971). Playing and reality. New York: Basic Books.
Wöhle, A. H. (2004). Luther, Lutheranism and spiritualistic phenomena. In I. Wulfhorst (Ed.),
Spiritualism: a challenge to the churches in Europe. (pp. 11-22). Geneva: The Lutheran World
Federation.
Woodhead, L. (2007). Why so many women in holistic spirituality? A puzzle revisited. In K. Flanagan
& P. Jupp (Eds.), A Sociology of Spirituality. (pp. 115-126). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Wortman, J. H., & Park, C. L. (2008). Religion and spirituality in adjustment following bereavement:
An integrative review. Death Studies, 32, 703–736.
Wulff, D. M. (1997). Psychology of religion. Classic and contemporary (2nd ed.). USA: John Wiley
& Sons Inc.
Wulff, D. M. (2010). Psychology of religion. In D. Leeming, K. Madden & S. Marlan (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion (pp. 732-735): Springer US.
Wulff, D.M. (2010). Psychology of religion. In D. Leeming, K. Madden & S. Marlan (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion (pp. 732-735). Boston: Springer.
Yamamoto, J., Okonogi, K., Iwasaki, T., & Yoshimura, S. (1969). Mourning in Japan. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 125(12), 1660–1665.
Zinnbauer, B. J., & Pargament, K. I. (2005). Religiousness and spirituality. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L.
Park (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 21–43). New York:
Guilford Press.
Zock, H. (2011). The existential self in a culture of multiplicity. Hubert Hermans theory of the
dialogical self. In J. Wentzel van Huyssteen & E. P. Wiebe (Eds.), In search of self.
Interdiciplinary perspectives on personhood (pp. 163–181). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company.
Zock, H. (2013). Religious voices in the dialogical self: Towards a conceptual-analytical framework
on the basis of Hubet Hermans’ dialogical self theory. In M. Buitelaar & H. Zock (Eds.), Religious
Voices in Self-Narratives. (pp. 11-36). Berlin: de Gruyter.
303
304
Appendixes
Appendix 1: Interview Agenda (In Norwegian)
(Hovedspørsmål uthevet, mulige oppfølgingsspørsmål i liten font)
INTRODUKSJON
Innledning hvor jeg forteller om prosjektet og om gangen i intervjuet

Du har sagt deg villig til å stille til intervju fordi du har hatt en opplevelse av en kontakt med
eller et nærvær av eller en relasjon til en avdød.
Først: Kan du si hvem du har eller har hatt kontakt med? (ektefelle, barn, venn, foreldre?)

Hvilket ord foretrekker du å bruke om den kontakten dere har?
ERFARINGEN AV NÆRVÆR/KONTAKT

Når opplevde du første gang en kontakt med (eller nærvær av) XX? Kan du beskrive
hvordan det var?
Hvordan merket du det? (hørte, kjente, så)
Sa den avdøde noe til deg? Sa du noe til ham/henne?
Hvor var du da du fikk kontakt med XX?

Hvordan reagerte du på dette nærværet/denne kontakten/ denne samtalen?

Du har hatt kontakt med XX flere ganger (utvalgskriterium). Hvor mange ganger/ hvor ofte hvis man kan si det sånn - vil du si at du har kontakt med xx siden han/hun døde?

Kan du beskrive den kontakten dere har nå/ hadde siste gang?

Har relasjonen mellom dere/kontakten endret seg fra du fikk kontakt første gang (etter xx
døde) og til nå?
305
Hvordan?

Hvordan opplevde du xx da han/hun levde?
Hvordan vil du beskrive ham/henne? Hvordan var relasjonen deres? Hva pleide dere å gjøre sammen?

Hvordan opplever du ham/henne nå, sammenliknet med da han/hun levde?
Er det xx sier/uttrykker/viser seg som typisk for ham/henne da han/hun levde? Hører du like mye på xx som du
gjorde da han/hun levde?
MEANING MAKING – SENSE MAKING

Hvordan forstår du det du har opplevd?
Har du noen teorier?
Hvor tror du xx er nå?
Hvorfor tror du han/hun henvender seg til deg?/kan kontaktes?
Hvordan har du kommet frem til denne forståelsen?

Har ditt livssyn hatt betydning for å forstå det som skjer når du har kontakt med xx? Kan du si
noe om hvordan?
Beskrive ditt livssyn
Beskrive xx sitt livssyn

Har noen av dine trosforestillinger /ditt livssyn/ det du tror på i livet endret seg etter at du fikk
kontakt med xx? Hvordan?

Har du hatt noen andre liknende opplevelser? Har det hatt betydning for å forstå og tolke det
du har opplevd?
Andre døde du har sett? Andre overnaturlige opplevelser?

Har andre mennesker hjulpet deg til å forstå det du har opplevd?
Noen spesielt viktige?

Du har sikkert lest noe eller hørt noe om dette fenomenet i media. Har det hatt betydning for å
forstå det du opplever/ har opplevd?
306
MEANING MAKING- SIGNIFICANCE

Hva betyr det for deg å ha kontakt med xx?

Vil du si at kontakten/samtalene hjelper deg eller hindrer deg/ eller begge deler i det du tenker
er et godt liv? Hvordan?
Hjelper xx deg med noe konkret? Hva?
Hindrer/ødelegger xx noe for deg? Hva?

Hva har denne kontakten betydd/ betyr for din sorg?

Hva har denne kontakten betydd/betyr for din tro/spiritualitet/ditt livssyn?

Hva betyr kontakten med xx for ditt forhold til dine nærmeste eller andre viktige personer i
livet ditt?
Hvordan vil du beskrive forholdet til dine levende venner og slektninger? Har du mange, få? Er dere tette?

Det xx betyr for deg – har det endret seg i løpet av den perioden du har hatt kontakt med
ham/henne etter dødsfallet?
Hvordan?
Hvis det ikke har kommet frem allerede:
LEGITIMITET

Har du fortalt om det du opplevde/ opplever til noen?
Til familie og venner? På jobben?
Hva gjør at du har fortalt om det/ ikke fortalt om det?
Hva tror du familie/ venner/ kolleger tenkte om deg etter å ha hørt at du hadde/ har en slik opplevelse?
Er det noen du kunne / ikke kunne ha fortalt det til?

Det har vært mye debatt om det å ha kontakt med døde i høst. Har du fulgt med på dette?
Hvordan har du opplevd å lese/høre det som var i media?
307
HELSE

Hvordan vil du si at livet og din psykiske helse var første gang du fikk kontakt? Og hvordan
vil du si at det er nå?
BAKGRUNNSSPØRSMÅL
Alder:
Utdanning:
Når døde vedkommende? Brå eller langsom død?
308
Appendix 2: Interview Agenda (English translation)
(Main interview questions in bold types, possible follow-ups in small types)
INTRODUCTION
Introduction where I describe the project and interview format

You have agreed to be interviewed because you have had an experience of a contact with or a
presence of or a relation to a deceased.
Firstly: Can you tell who you have or have had contact with? (spouse, child, friend, parent?)

Which word do you prefer to use about this contact you have?
EXPERIENCE OF PRESENCE/CONTACT

When was the first time you experienced a contact with (or presence of) XX? Can you
describe how it was?
How did you perceive it? (Heard, felt, saw)
Did the deceased say anything to you? Did you say anything to him/her?
Where were you when you received contact with XX?

How did you react to this presence/this contact/ this conversation?

You have had contact with XX several times (selection criteria). How many times/ how often
– if one can say it like this – would you say that you have had contact with xx since he/she
died?

Can you describe the contact you have now/ had last time?

Has the relationship between you/ the contact changed itself from when you first received
contact (after xx died) and up until now?
How?

How did you experience xx when he/she lived?
How would you describe him/her? How was your relationship? What did you usually do together?

How do you experience him/her now, compared with when he/she lived?
309
Is that which xx says/expresses/shows typical for him/her when he/she lived? Do you still listen to xx as much as
you did when he/she lived?
MEANING MAKING – SENSE MAKING

How do you understand that which you have experienced?
Do you have any theories?
Where do you think xx is now?
Why do you think he/she address themselves to you? /can be contacted?
How have you come to this understanding?

Has your worldview had any meaning in understanding that which happens when you have
contact with xx? Can you say anything about how?
Describe your (religious, spiritual or secular) worldview
Describe xx’s worldview

Have any of your beliefs/ your worldview/ that which you believe in in life changed itself after
you received contact with xx? How?

Have you had any other similar experiences? Has it had any meaning in understanding and
interpreting that which you have experienced?
Any other deceased you have seen? Any other supernatural experiences?

Have any other people helped you understand that which you have experienced?
Anyone particularly important?

You have surely read something or heard something about this phenomenon in the media. Has
that had any meaning for understanding that which you experience/ have experienced?
MEANING MAKING- SIGNIFICANCE

What does it mean for you that you have contact with xx?

Would you say that this contact/ conversation helps you or hinders you/ or both in that which
you think is a good life? How?
Does xx help you with anything concrete? What?
Does xx hinder/ Ruin anything for you? What?

What has this contact meant/mean for your sorrow?
310

What has this contact meant/ mean for your worldview/faith/ spirituality?

What does this contact with xx mean for your relationship to those closest to you or other
important people in your life?
How would you describe your relationship to your living friends and relatives? Do you have many, few? Are you
close?

That which xx means for you – has it changed itself in the course of the period you have had
contact with him/her after their death? If so, how?
If it hasn’t already been discussed:
LEGITIMACY

Have you told anyone about that which you have experienced/ experience?
To family or friends? At work?
What made you speak about it/ not speak about it?
What do you think family/ friends/ colleagues thought about you after having heard that you had/ have such an
experience?
Is there anyone you could/ could not speak about it with?

There was a lot of debate about having contact with the deceased in the fall. Have you been
following along with this? How have you experienced reading/ hearing about that which was
in the media?
HEALTH

How would you say that your life and psychological health were the first time you received
contact. And how would you say it is now?
BACKGROUND QUESTIONS
Age:
Education:
When did those concerned die? Violent death? Old age?
311
Appendix 3: Information document and question of consent (in Norwegian)
Forespørsel om å delta i forskningsprosjekt
I forbindelse med min doktorgrad gjennomfører jeg et prosjekt om hva det betyr for etterlatte å ha
kontakt med - eller kommunisere med - en død venn eller slektning. Hensikten med prosjektet er å få
mer forståelse og kunnskap om hvordan en relasjon mellom en levende og en død person kan erfares.
Dernest er målet å se hvilken betydning denne relasjonen oppleves å ha for livssyn og livskvalitet.
For å finne ut av dette, vil jeg intervjue 13 – 16 personer som har erfart en slik kontakt. Jeg ønsker
muligens å gjennomføre et oppfølgingsintervju med noen av deltakerne.
Jeg vil bruke diktafon/båndopptaker og ta notater mens vi snakker sammen. Intervjuet vil antagelig
vare fra en til to timer. Vi blir sammen enige om tid og sted.
Det er ingen andre en mine to veiledere og jeg som vil få tilgang til personidentifiserbare
opplysninger. De er underlagt taushetsplikt og opplysningene vil bli behandlet strengt konfidensielt.
Ingen enkeltpersoner vil kunne gjenkjennes i den ferdige avhandlingen.
Opplysningene anonymiseres og opptakene slettes når prosjektet forventes ferdig i 2014.
Det er helt frivillig å delta i prosjektet og du har mulighet til å trekke deg når som helst underveis, uten
å måtte begrunne dette nærmere. Dersom du trekker deg, vil alle innsamlede data om deg bli
anonymisert.
Prosjektet er meldt til Personvernombudet for forskning, Norsk samfunnsvitenskapelig datatjeneste
A/S.
Dersom du ønsker å delta i undersøkelsen, er det fint om du signerer den vedlagte
samtykkeerklæringen og sender den til meg.
Har du spørsmål i forbindelse med denne henvendelsen, kan du gjerne ta kontakt med meg på
telefonnummeret eller e-postadressen under
Med vennlig hilsen
Anne Austad
Diakonhjemmet Høgskole
Pb 184, 0319 Oslo
Tel 22 45 19 10 / 92 44 69 04
e- post: [email protected]
312
---------------------------Samtykkeerklæring:
Jeg har mottatt informasjon om prosjektet ”Kontakt med døde – mening for etterlatte” og er villig til å
delta i studien.
Signatur …………………………………. Telefonnummer ……………………………..
313
Appendix 4: Information document and question of consent (English
translation)
Request to participate in a research project
In association with my doctorate I am undertaking a project about what it means for the bereaved to
have contact with – or communicate with – a dead friend or relative. The intent of this project is to
achieve a better understanding and knowledge of how a relationship between a living and a deceased
person can be experienced. Secondly, the goal is to see what meaning this relationship has for
worldview and quality of life.
To find out about this, I will interview 13-16 people which have experienced such a contact. I may
wish to undergo follow-up meetings with some of these participants.
I will use a dictaphone/tape recorder and take notes while we speak together. The interview will
presumably last from one to two hours. We will agree together over the time and place.
There are no others besides my two supervisors and myself who will have access to identifying
personal details. They are subject to professional secrecy and information will be held strictly
confidential. No individuals will be recognizable in the finalized thesis. The information will be
anonymized and recordings deleted when the projected is expected to be finished in 2014.
It is completely voluntary to partake in this project and you have the option of withdrawing at any
time, without giving any further reason. Should you withdraw, all collected data will be anonymized.
The project has been reported to Norwegian Social Science Data Service (Norsk
samfunnsvitenskapelig datatjeneste A/S).
Should you wish to partake in this study, please sign the attached consent statement and send it to me.
If you have any questions regarding this communication, please contact me via telephone or e-mail
listed below.
Sincerely
Anne Austad
Diakonhjemmet Høgskole
Pb 184, 0319 Oslo
Tel 22 45 19 10 / 92 44 69 04
e- mail: [email protected]
314
---------------------------Consent Statement:
I have received the information for the project «Contact with the deceased – meaning for the
bereaved» and am willing to partake in this study.
Signature …………………………………. Telephone number ……………………………..
315
Appendix 5: Permission from the Norwegian Social Science Data Service
(Norsk samfunnsvitenskapelig datatjeneste A/S).
316