MKT62504 | Presentation & Situation Analysis
22/04/2026 - 13/05/2026 (Week 1 - Week 4)
LIST OF CONTENT :
MIB
LECTURES
Week 1
Week 2
INSTRUCTIONS
PROCESS
CASE STUDY RESEARCH
Full Case Study Report
Final Case Study Report
SITUATION ANALYSIS
WHAT IS THE TOPIC?
“The Cycle of Mourning: How Grief and Anxiety Meet”
WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
The “Cycle of Mourning”
The “cycle of mourning” is a conceptual framework synthesised from the Dual Process Model (Stroebe & Schut, 1999) and broader grief literature, used to describe grief as an oscillatory rather than linear process. It refers to the idea that grief is not a linear process with a clear endpoint, but a shifting process in which individuals move back and forth between different emotional and mental states over time. Rather than “moving on,” individuals:
- revisit emotions
- reprocess memories
- renegotiate meaning in cycles that may be triggered unpredictably by internal or external cues.
This is supported by the Dual Process Model (Stroebe & Schut, 1999), where individuals oscillate between:
- loss-focused states (confronting grief)
- life-focused states (engaging with daily life)
The “cycle” therefore reflects:
- movement rather than resolution
- fluctuation rather than stability
- integration rather than closure
Mourning
Mourning refers to the external and social expression of grief. It includes:
- behaviours (rituals, withdrawal, remembrance)
- cultural practices (funerals, memorials)
- visible emotional expression
Mourning is influenced by:
- social norms
- cultural expectations
- interpersonal environments
Importantly, mourning is shaped by what is considered acceptable, which means some forms of loss may not be openly acknowledged.
Grief
Grief is the internal psychological and emotional response to loss. It involves:
- emotional reactions (sadness, anger, longing)
- cognitive disruption (confusion, rumination)
- identity disturbance (loss of self-continuity)
Contemporary theories (e.g., Robert A. Neimeyer) position grief as:
- an ongoing process of meaning reconstruction
- a reorganisation of one’s internal world after loss
Grief is not limited to death—it includes:
- relational loss (breakups, friendships)
- symbolic loss (identity, future expectations)
Anxiety
Anxiety is a state of heightened psychological and physiological arousal associated with uncertainty, threat perception, and loss of control. It includes:
- restlessness and hypervigilance
- racing thoughts and rumination
- physical symptoms (tightness, increased heart rate)
In the context of grief, anxiety emerges from:
- uncertainty (“What now?”)
- disrupted attachment systems
- loss of predictability and control
This overlap is supported by work from Mary-Frances O'Connor, showing that grief activates brain systems linked to:
- attachment
- reward
- pain processing
Summary
The cycle of mourning exists at the intersection of these three components:
- Grief → internal experience of loss
- Mourning → external expression shaped by society
- Anxiety → physiological and cognitive response to disruption
Together, they form a system where:
- grief generates emotional and cognitive instability
- mourning attempts to structure or express it
- anxiety emerges when the experience cannot be resolved or contained
Note: Grief and anxiety overlap in mechanisms but remain distinct psychological constructs.
WHY DOES IT OCCUR?
The overlap between grief and anxiety can be understood through three interacting levels: biological, cognitive, and social. These three levels interact with each other, meaning grief is not purely psychological or biological, but shaped by the combination of internal processes and external expectations.
1. Biological (Body / Brain Systems)
Grief involves activation of brain and physiological systems linked to attachment and stress regulation.
Research (O’Connor, 2008; 2022) suggests bereavement engages:
- attachment systems
- reward-related pathways
- stress response systems
These responses reflect the body’s reaction to disruption of an important emotional bond.
2. Cognitive (Thinking and Interpretation)
Grief affects how people process thoughts, meaning, and uncertainty. This may include:
- repetitive thinking or rumination (Nolen-Hoeksema, 2000)
- difficulty integrating the loss into meaning systems (Neimeyer, 2001)
- increased sensitivity to uncertainty and lack of control (Dugas et al., 2004)
These processes can resemble anxiety because both involve sustained cognitive activation under uncertainty.
3. Social (Culture and Expectations)
Grief is also shaped by social expectations and cultural norms. (Walter, 1999; 2015) These often define grief as:
- time-limited
- emotionally visible
- expected to resolve or “improve” over time
When personal experience does not match these expectations, individuals may:
- question their emotional response
- feel pressure to perform “appropriate grief”
- misinterpret their own state (especially when grief is less visible or more internalised)
WHY THIS TOPIC?
This topic comes from something I didn’t understand at the time.
When I lost a parent, I expected grief to look a certain way. But it didn’t. I cried, I processed it, and then I moved on. Not in a forced way, just in a very matter-of-fact way. They weren’t coming back either way. At some point, I even caught myself thinking that maybe things were better with them gone. And that thought didn’t feel dramatic or emotional—it just felt honest.
The problem was that no one else around me seemed to be experiencing it like that. Their grief looked heavier, more visible, more ongoing. Mine didn’t. And because of that, I started questioning myself. I thought maybe I didn’t know how to grieve properly. Or worse, that I wasn’t feeling enough. A lot of what I did feel didn’t even register as grief. It showed up as restlessness, overthinking, and not being able to settle—something closer to anxiety than sadness.
Looking back, the issue wasn’t that I didn’t grieve. It was that my grief didn’t match what I thought it was supposed to look like. That’s why this topic matters to me. I’m interested in the versions of grief that don’t look obvious, that don’t get recognised, and that make people question themselves—especially when they overlap with something like anxiety. This led me to develop the idea of a “cycle of mourning” as a way to frame grief that oscillates between emotional states and may manifest differently across individuals, including as anxiety-like responses.
FURTHER RESEARCH
1. Grief as a Physiological Stress Response
Research by Mary-Frances O'Connor (2008; 2022) demonstrates that grief is not only emotional but also physiological, activating the body’s stress regulation systems.
Neuroimaging studies show that bereavement is associated with:
- increased activity in stress-related neural networks
- dysregulation of sleep and circadian rhythms
- immune and hormonal changes linked to chronic stress responses
Earlier work by O’Connor et al. (2008) also found that grief activates brain regions associated with:
- attachment (bonding systems)
- reward (dopaminergic pathways)
- pain processing (anterior cingulate cortex)
Implication:
Grief operates as a whole-body response, not a purely emotional state.
Relevance to project:
This supports designing grief as something that can be physically experienced through interaction, not just visually represented.
2. Oscillation Between Coping States (Dual Process Model)
The Dual Process Model developed by Margaret Stroebe and Henk Schut (1999) provides strong empirical grounding for grief as a dynamic regulatory process, not a linear progression.
The model identifies two alternating coping orientations:
- Loss-oriented coping: confronting emotions, memories, and separation distress
- Restoration-oriented coping: adapting to life changes, distraction, rebuilding routines
Crucially, the theory proposes that healthy adaptation depends on continuous oscillation between these states.
Implication:
Grief is structurally unstable and cyclical by design, not something that resolves in a fixed sequence.
Relevance to project:
Direct justification for designing systems that:
- shift states unpredictably
- prevent emotional “stabilisation”
- reflect cyclical experience rather than resolution
3. Cognitive Disruption and Rumination
Research by Susan Nolen-Hoeksema (2000) identifies rumination as a key mechanism in prolonged emotional distress.
Rumination involves:
- repetitive, passive focus on distressing content
- difficulty disengaging from negative thought loops
- impaired problem-solving ability
In grief contexts, rumination is associated with:
- sustained emotional activation
- difficulty integrating the loss into memory
- overlap with anxiety and depressive symptoms
Implication:
Grief is cognitively recursive—it loops rather than resolves.
Relevance to project:
Supports interaction ideas involving:
- repetitive cycles
- feedback loops
- inability to “exit” emotional states cleanly
4. Intolerance of Uncertainty and Anxiety Overlap
Research by Michel J. Dugas et al. (2004) identifies intolerance of uncertainty as a core driver of anxiety disorders.
This involves:
- discomfort with ambiguous situations
- need for cognitive closure
- heightened threat perception under uncertainty
Grief inherently introduces:
- unresolved meaning
- unpredictability of emotional states
- loss of future certainty
Implication:
Grief creates the exact conditions that trigger anxiety responses.
Relevance to project:
Direct evidence for the conceptual link between grief and anxiety in your campaign.
5. Continuing Bonds and Persistent Attachment
The Continuing Bonds framework by Dennis Klass, Phyllis R. Silverman, and Steven L. Nickman (1996) challenges the assumption that healthy grieving requires emotional detachment.
Instead, empirical observations show that many individuals:
- maintain internal relationships with the deceased
- engage in ongoing symbolic connection
- reinterpret rather than sever attachment bonds
Implication:
Grief is not about closure but ongoing relational transformation.
Relevance to project:
Justifies non-linear, persistent, and evolving interaction systems.
6. Disenfranchised Grief and Social Validation
The concept introduced by Kenneth J. Doka (1989) identifies grief that is not socially recognised or validated.
This occurs when:
- the loss is not publicly acknowledged
- the relationship is not socially sanctioned
- the grief response is minimised or dismissed
Research shows this leads to:
- reduced social support
- increased internalisation of emotion
- higher psychological distress risk
Implication:
Grief is partially regulated by external validation systems, not only internal experience.
Relevance to project:
Supports your focus on misrecognition and invisible grief states.
7. Social Norms of Grieving Behaviour
Sociological research by Tony Walter (1999; later works in 2015) argues that grief is shaped by cultural scripts, not just psychological processes.
These scripts define:
- acceptable duration of grief
- appropriate emotional expression
- public visibility of mourning
Deviation from these norms often results in:
- perceived emotional inadequacy
- social misunderstanding
- self-regulation of grief expression
Implication:
Grief is socially structured and performative.
Relevance to project:
Explains why individuals may feel they are “grieving incorrectly.”
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Across psychological, neurological, and sociological research, grief is consistently described as:
- cyclical (not linear)
- cognitively recursive
- physiologically embodied
- socially regulated
- closely linked to anxiety mechanisms
However cultural understanding still treats it as linear, resolved, and emotionally singular.
PROBLEM / GAP
Despite strong interdisciplinary research showing that grief is a cyclical, embodied, and socially mediated process, public understanding still often relies on simplified linear models of mourning.
Gap between Research and Cultural Understanding
Contemporary models such as the Dual Process Model (Margaret Stroebe & Henk Schut, 1999) and Continuing Bonds theory (Dennis Klass et al., 1996) describe grief as:
- non-linear
- oscillatory
- ongoing rather than resolved
However, dominant cultural narratives still frame grief as:
- sequential (e.g., “stages”)
- time-limited
- something that should end in “closure”
Resulting Gap:
A disconnect exists between how grief is scientifically understood and how it is socially expected to be experienced.
Misrecognition of Grief-related Anxiety
Research in grief neuroscience (O'Connor, 2008; 2022) and anxiety theory (Michel J. Dugas, 2004) shows that grief and anxiety share overlapping mechanisms, including:
- stress system activation
- uncertainty processing
- cognitive rumination
However, in lived experience, these symptoms are often:
- interpreted solely as anxiety disorders
- disconnected from grief as a cause
Resulting Gap:
Individuals may not recognise grief when it presents in anxiety-like forms at the personal level (self-interpretation), and it may also be categorised differently at the clinical level (as anxiety or related disorders rather than grief-linked responses).
Lack of Recognition for Non-visible & Non-normative Grief
The concept of disenfranchised grief (Kenneth J. Doka, 1989) identifies losses that are not socially validated, such as:
- relationship breakdowns
- identity shifts
- ambiguous or non-death losses
These forms of grief are often not socially recognised or validated. These forms of grief often lack:
- external acknowledgment
- social permission to grieve
- structured support
Resulting Gap:
Grief that is not visibly or socially recognised becomes internalised, increasing emotional isolation and reducing validation.
Gap In How Grief Is Communicated & Experienced In Design/Media
Most public-facing grief communication (including awareness campaigns) tends to:
- explain grief conceptually
- provide information or support resources
- avoid simulating emotional experience
However, research suggests grief involves:
- embodied stress responses (O’Connor, 2008; 2022)
- cognitive looping and rumination (Nolen-Hoeksema, 2000)
- oscillation between emotional states (Stroebe & Schut, 1999)
Resulting Gap:
There is a lack of experiential, interactive approaches that allow individuals to recognise grief through lived simulation rather than explanation.
Overall, the key problem is: Although research defines grief as cyclical, embodied, and closely linked to anxiety, cultural and communicative systems still represent it as linear, emotionally singular, and socially standardised. This mismatch leads to a multi-layer misrecognition system of grief by individuals and social expectations—particularly when it manifests in less visible forms such as anxiety, avoidance, or emotional numbness.
CONTEXT
Mental health discourse has become increasingly visible across education and digital platforms, but grief is still largely communicated through simplified, linear frameworks (e.g. stages, closure, recovery narratives). This contrasts with research such as the Dual Process Model (Margaret Stroebe & Henk Schut, 1999), which defines grief as cyclical and oscillatory.
At the same time, anxiety is more commonly discussed as a standalone condition in both clinical and digital self-help contexts, even though research by Michel J. Dugas (2004) shows it is closely linked to uncertainty—something also central in grief processes. This creates a gap where grief-related anxiety is often misidentified or treated separately, rather than understood as interconnected.
In digital culture, emotional experiences are further shaped by social media, where grief is often expected to be visibly processed and time-limited, reinforcing performative “recovery” rather than ongoing fluctuation (Tony Walter, 2015).
Existing campaigns and content typically focus on awareness and support, but remain largely informational rather than experiential, rarely representing the embodied or cyclical nature of grief identified in neuroscience research (O'Connor, 2008; 2022).
AUDIENCE LIFESTYLE / BEHAVIOURS
The primary audience consists of young adults (18–30), particularly students and early-career individuals navigating identity formation, emotional independence, and unstable life transitions.
Lifestyle
This group is highly digitally engaged, spending significant time on social media platforms where emotional experiences are frequently shared, observed, and compared. Their daily routines are often structured around study, work, and online interaction, with limited uninterrupted time for emotional processing. Emotional expression is shaped by digital environments that tend to favour concise, visible, and “resolved” narratives.
Behaviours
When dealing with emotional distress or loss, this audience often:
- continues functioning through routine and productivity
- processes emotions internally rather than externally
- uses distraction (social media, work, entertainment) as regulation
- delays or avoids direct emotional confrontation
- reflects on emotions retrospectively rather than in real time
Grief in particular may not always be immediately recognised as “grief,” especially when it does not involve socially defined forms of loss such as bereavement. Grief may not always come in the form of death-related loss.
Pressures
This group experiences both internal and external pressures, including:
- expectations to “move on” within a reasonable timeframe
- comparison with others’ visible emotional responses
- uncertainty about whether their emotional response is valid
- the need to appear functional in academic or professional environments
These pressures can lead to self-doubt, particularly when emotional responses do not align with perceived “normal” grieving behaviour.
Key Behavioural Insight
Emotional experiences are often processed indirectly rather than explicitly, meaning grief-related responses may surface as:
- anxiety-like symptoms
- overthinking and rumination
- emotional detachment or numbness
PROPOSED IDEA
CAMPAIGN PURPOSE
DESIRED IMPACT
BRAND PERSONALITY & MESSAGE
The campaign adopts a calm, restrained, and reflective personality, avoiding instructional or prescriptive tones. It is observational rather than directive, creating space for users to interpret their own emotional responses without judgement.
The tone is intentionally minimal and grounded, with a sense of emotional sensitivity rather than reassurance or positivity. It acknowledges complexity without trying to resolve it.
Core message:
Grief is not a linear process that ends, but a cyclical experience that can feel like loss, anxiety, and functioning at the same time.
INSIGHT STATEMENT
People often interpret grief-related responses - especially emotional instability, numbness, or anxiety - as personal failure or unrelated mental distress, because grief is culturally understood as a linear process rather than a cyclical and ongoing experience.
BRAND GOALS & OBJECTIVES
Goals
- Reframe grief as a cyclical, ongoing process rather than a linear path to closure
- Increase understanding of the overlap between grief and anxiety through experiential interaction
- Challenge cultural expectations that grief should be visible, time-limited, or resolved
Objectives
- Enable users to recognise non-linear emotional responses as valid forms of grief
- Translate key grief research (e.g. Dual Process Model by Margaret Stroebe & Henk Schut, 1999) into interactive experiences
- Improve emotional awareness of grief-related states such as anxiety, numbness, and detachment
- Encourage reflection on personal experiences of grief that may not align with conventional expectations
RELEVANCE / RESONANCE
This campaign is relevant because grief is still widely misunderstood as a linear and time-bound process, despite research showing it is cyclical and ongoing (Margaret Stroebe & Henk Schut, 1999). At the same time, anxiety is increasingly prevalent among young adults, yet its connection to grief is rarely acknowledged in public discourse, even though grief responses can overlap with anxiety-related symptoms (O'Connor, 2008; 2022).
It resonates particularly with young adults who are navigating identity formation, emotional instability, and non-traditional forms of loss, where grief is often unrecognised or self-invalidated. By translating these experiences into an interactive system, the campaign reflects lived emotional complexity that is often missing in existing mental health communication.
CREATIVE OPPORTUNITY STATEMENT
SWOT ANALYSIS
Strengths
Weaknesses
Opportunities
Threats
CUSTOMER JOURNEY MAP
FEEDBACK
REFLECTION
REFERENCES
Core Grief Theory
Doka, K. J. (1989). Disenfranchised grief: Recognizing hidden sorrow. Lexington Books. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL2408597M/Disenfranchised_grief
Klass, D., Silverman, P. R., & Nickman, S. L. (1996). Continuing bonds: New understandings of grief. Taylor & Francis. https://www.routledge.com/Continuing-Bonds-New-Understandings-of-Grief/Klass-Silverman-Nickman/p/book/9781560323396
Neimeyer, R. A. (Ed.). (2001). Meaning reconstruction and the experience of loss. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10397-000
Stroebe, M., & Schut, H. (1999). The dual process model of coping with bereavement: Rationale and description. Death Studies, 23(3), 197–224. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10848151/
Neuroscience of Grief
O'Connor, M.-F. (2022). The grieving brain: The surprising science of how we learn from love and loss. HarperOne. https://maryfrancesoconnor.org/books/the-grieving-brain
O'Connor, M.-F., Wellisch, D. K., Stanton, A. L., Eisenberger, N. I., Irwin, M. R., & Lieberman, M. D. (2008). Craving love? Enduring grief activates the brain's reward center. NeuroImage, 42(2), 969–972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.04.256
Anxiety & Cognitive Mechanisms
Dugas, M. J., Buhr, K., & Ladouceur, R. (2004). The role of intolerance of uncertainty in generalized anxiety disorder. In R. G. Heimberg, C. L. Turk, & D. S. Mennin (Eds.), Generalized anxiety disorder: Advances in research and practice (pp. 143–163). Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2004-00000-007
Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2000). The role of rumination in depressive disorders and mixed anxiety/depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109(3), 504–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.109.3.504
Attachment Theory
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3. Loss, sadness and depression. Basic Books. https://sycofx.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/john-bowlby-loss-sadness-and-depression-attachment-and-loss-1982.pdf
Sociology & Cultural Grief
Walter, T. (1999). On bereavement: The culture of grief. Open University Press. https://archive.org/details/onbereavementcul0000walt
Walter, T. (2015). New mourners, old mourners: Online memorial culture as a chapter in the history of mourning. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 21(1–2), 10–24. https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/publications/new-mourners-old-mourners-online-memorial-culture-as-a-chapter-in
Developmental / Identity Context
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469
Clinical Classification Systems
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.; DSM-5-TR). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787