We present a revision of the 1978 reformulated theory of helplessness and depression and call it the hopelessness theory of depression. Although the 1978 reformulation has generated a vast amount of empirical work on depression over the past 10 years and recently has been evaluated as a model of depression, we do not think that it presents a clearly articulated theory of depression. We build on the skeletal logic of the 1978 statement and (a) propose a hypothesized subtype of depressionhopelessness depression, (b) introduce hopelessness as a proximal sufficient cause of the symptoms of hopelessness depression, (c) deemphasize causal attributions because inferred negative consequences and inferred negative characteristics about the self are also postulated to contribute to the formation of hopelessness and, in turn, the symptoms of hopelessness depression, and (d) clarify the diathesisstress and causal mediation components implied, but not explicitly articulated, in the 1978 statement. We report promising findings for the hopelessness theory and outline the aspects that still need to be tested. In this article, we present a revision of the 1978 reformulated theory of helplessness and depression (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978) and call it the hopelessness theory of depression. Our motive for proposing the revision is that, although the 1978 reformulation has generated a vast amount of empirical work on depression over the past 10 years (see Sweeney, Anderson, & Bailey, 1986, for a meta-analysis of 104 studies) and recently has been evaluated as a model of depression (Bamett & Gotlib, 1988; Brewin, 1985; Coyne & Gotlib, 1983; Peterson & Seligman, 1984), the 1978 article did not explicitly present a clearly articulated theory of depression. Instead, it presented an attributional account of human helplessness and only briefly discussed its implications for depression. Perhaps it is no surprise, then, that much controversy currently exists about the status of the reformulated theory of depression. Some reviewers have argued that it has strong empirical support (Peterson & Seligman, 1984), others have contended that it has a weak empirical base (Barnett & Gotlib, 1988; Coyne & Gotlib, 1983), and still others have suggested it never has been tested adequately (Ab

No abstract

To test Coyne's (1976b) theory of depression, students' levels of depressive symptoms, reassurance seeking, and self-esteem were assessed at Time 1, and their same-gender roommates' appraisals of them were assessed 5 weeks later. Mildly depressed students engaged in the type of reassurance seeking described by Coyne. Among men, but not women, mildly depressed students were rejected if they strongly sought reassurance and had low self-esteem but not if they did not seek reassurance or had high self-esteem. Although induction of depressed symptoms in roommates did occur, this contagion effect did not account for the depression-rejection relationship. The prediction that unsupportive, intolerant, or unempathic others would be particularly likely to respond with rejection to reassurance-seeking depressed students with low self-esteem received partial support. Implications for future work on the interpersonal aspects of depression are discussed.

To provide a more powerful test of the diathesis-stress component of the reformulated theory of depression (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978), we extended and refined the Metalsky, Abramson, Seligman, Semmel, and Peterson (1982) study and examined whether the content of college students' attributional styles (hypothesized attributional diathesis) as measured at Time 1 interacted with the outcomes students received on a class midterm exam to predict their subsequent depressive mood responses. In addition, to test the mediation component of the theory, we examined whether the relation between the hypothesized attributional diathesis and failure students' subsequent depressive mood responses to their low midterm grades was mediated by the particular causal attributions these students made for their low grades. The results partially corroborated the current statement (Abramson, Alloy, & Metalsky, 1986; Abramson, Metalsky, & Alloy, 1986a, 1986b) of the diathesis-stress component of the theory. Whereas students' immediate depressive mood reactions were predicted solely by the outcomes they received on the class midterm exams, their enduring depressive mood reactions were predicted solely by the hypothesized Attributional Diathesis X Outcome on Midterm Exam interaction. The direction and form of the interaction were in line with prediction. The results fully corroborated predictions derived from the mediation component of the theory as they applied to students' enduring mood responses.