LAUSR

The meaning making model provides a useful framework for integrating myriad existing meaning-related theories and empirical findings. In this overview, I describe this model, which comprises both global and situational (event-specific) aspects. Global meaning encompasses foundational beliefs, values and goals, and a subjective sense of meaningfulness while situational meaning entails the appraisal of an experience. When an experience is perceived as discrepant with global meaning, individuals experience distress and engage in a variety of efforts to make meaning of that experience. Meaning making is usually aimed at changing the meaning of the situation but can also involve changing global meaning (e.g., adopting a new way of understanding the world or new goals; i.e., meaning made). Successful meaning making reduces discrepancies between global meaning and individuals’ assigned meaning of the specific experience and restores harmony within their global meaning vis-à-vis their current experience. The model of meaning making described here is based on a growing body of research regarding responses to adversity, such as serious illness, bereavement, sexual assault, incest, the COVID-19 pandemic, natural disasters, and terrorist attacks [Fitzke et al., 2021; see Park et al. (2017) and Park and Blake (2020), for reviews]. This model distinguishes two levels of meaning: global (people’s fundamental and overarching beliefs and their hierarchies of goals and values; Park, 2010) and situational (how global meaning, in conjunction with a given particular context, influences assigning meaning and responding to a particular situation; Park, 2017; Figure 1).