Supports the claims that expressive writing did not yield significant long-term effects on depressive symptoms, and that effects were larger with more sessions and more specific writing topics. Depressive symptoms only.
Who was studied
39 randomized controlled trials (64 comparisons) in physically healthy adults with varying stress but without PTSD.
Design
Meta-analysis
Level of evidence
Syntheses of controlled studies: meta-analyses and systematic reviews of experiments and trials.
Claims that rest on it
Each claim states what the site asserts, at what strength, and with what caveat.
EmpiricalLevel AConfidence MODERATE
Brief self-directed expressive writing had no significant long-term effect on depressive symptoms in healthy adults under stress, with larger effects for more sessions and specific topics, and had a small positive overall effect in adolescents.
Scope
Randomised trials in physically healthy adults without PTSD and studies of youth aged 10 to 18.
Caveat
Moderator findings compare studies; the adolescent evidence was judged promising but not decisive.
Last reviewed · Review due · expressive-writing-limited-for-depression-and-youth
Sources
Reinhold, M., Bürkner, P.-C., & Holling, H. (2018). Effects of expressive writing on depressive symptoms: A meta-analysis. doi:10.1111/cpsp.12224
Level AMeta-analysis
Supports the claims that expressive writing did not yield significant long-term effects on depressive symptoms, and that effects were larger with more sessions and more specific writing topics. Depressive symptoms only.
Travagin, G., Margola, D., & Revenson, T. A. (2015). How effective are expressive writing interventions for adolescents? A meta-analytic review. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2015.01.003
Level AMeta-analysis
Supports the claims that expressive writing had a small positive overall effect in adolescents (g = 0.127), that few moderators were significant, and that higher-dosage protocols were associated with larger effects on somatic complaints. The authors judge the evidence promising but not decisive.
TheoreticalLevel DConfidence MODERATE
Why written disclosure helps, and for whom, remains unclear; the features associated with benefit, such as writing about facts and feelings, specific topics and changes in causal and insight language, are more consistent with sense-making than with discharge.
Scope
Theories of the written disclosure paradigm.
Caveat
An interpretation of converging findings; no single mechanism has been established.
Last reviewed · Review due · expressive-writing-mechanism-unclear
Sources
Sloan, D. M., & Marx, B. P. (2004). Taking pen to hand: Evaluating theories underlying the written disclosure paradigm. doi:10.1093/clipsy.bph062
Level DReview
Supports the claim that it remained unclear why written disclosure is effective and for whom it is best suited, although it may benefit some individuals. Narrative review.
Supports the claim that changes in cognitive and linguistic processes during writing predict better health more than reduced inhibition alone. A review by the paradigm's originator; later meta-analyses report variable effects.
Reinhold, M., Bürkner, P.-C., & Holling, H. (2018). Effects of expressive writing on depressive symptoms: A meta-analysis. doi:10.1111/cpsp.12224
Level AMeta-analysis
Supports the claims that expressive writing did not yield significant long-term effects on depressive symptoms, and that effects were larger with more sessions and more specific writing topics. Depressive symptoms only.