Writing is my lifeline. It is the raft upon which I am able to float to safety. It is the hand reaching over the cliff to pull me up. It is the only way that I know how to process and channel my emotions, a technique that I have perfected over the years. 

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​​​​

 

​​​

August 2nd, 2009: my very first journal entry (as is shown above). Though they began as most first-hand accounts written by children often do—recounting the events of my most recent playdate—my journals ultimately served as a place for me to share my thoughts, feelings, emotions, and ideas when there was no one left to listen. On January 12th, 2016, I wrote, "This is the only place I can really talk. This journal puts my soul into words. I've only recently been writing in my journal daily. Maybe it's because I've lost the power to truly speak anywhere else." While these words are at least a partial product of my thirteen year-old angst, they still hold true to this day.

​

METHOD:

​

DESIGN

The data pool from which the journal entries were drawn consisted of [# of journals] journals; the earliest journal was  written in 2009 and the most recent in 2024—spanning a total of 15 years. If an entry was not identified as an example of expressive writing it was excluded from the dataset. I decided to employ a qualitative content analysis (QCA), the goal of which is to detect and decipher meaning from a collection of textual or visual content (Assarroudi et al., 2018). More specifically, conventional QCA—the method used—allows for direct interaction with the source material while inhibiting preconceived notions of researchers (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). Additionally, the codes in conventional QCA are constantly reevaluated throughout the coding process as opposed to working from a  predetermined set of codes created without regard to the data itself (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).

 

Codes—what I was doing with my writing, overarching themes, and select quotations—were developed throughout the process of analysis. Not one, but two analyses were conducted. The first applied codes as they revealed themselves; the second combed back through earlier journal entries and applied the new codes, accounting for any necessary changes. A select few entries were recategorized, but the majority remained the same after the final round of analysis. 

 

PROCEDURE

A preliminary set of codes was created based on initial observations of the journal entries themselves. As previously mentioned, the codes themselves were revised and refined throughout the first round of analysis. As it stands, the final list of themes is as follows: identity exploration, identifying negative triggers, big life events, reflection, and narrative recall. An entry was considered as “reflection” if it consisted of discussion of recent experiences/exploration of questions I might not have been able to explore in conversation with others. Entries were also considered “reflection” if they called back to past experiences in an effort to change similar situations later down the line. An entry was considered “narrative recall” if it consisted of retrospectively recalling an event or experience—almost like a story. 

One journal entry constituted a single unit of analysis and could only exemplify one of the five possible themes. Responses were independently coded using Google Sheets software. Disparities between multiple themes were starred and reevaluated during the second round of analysis. Testing and training for the establishment of inter-coder reliability was not necessary as there was only one coder (me!) completing the analysis.

 

RESULTS:​

​

Journal 7 was excluded from the following analyses due to an uncharacteristically low number of entries and status as an outlier among the data.

​

I am a firm believer in the importance of open-source research, thus, the document containing the content analysis itself can be viewed by clicking this link.

​

58

average # of entries

per journal

​

22.3%

average amount of journal

content that is expressive writing

​

Themes

identity exploration, identifying negative triggers,

big life events, reflection*, narrative recall*​

​

*Most common​​

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​​​

​​

​

The most salient observation gathered from my analysis is the dramatic increase in writing (measured by the number of journal entries) following a traumatic event. Not only would the frequency of journal entries skyrocket after a trauma, but that pattern would begin to decrease, starting slowly but quickly progressing to a much faster pace. This underscores the effectiveness of writing as an intervention to help process one's trauma. Of course, we cannot assume causation from mere correlation; however, it is definitely something to consider when interpreting these results more broadly.