A re-view of cognitive mediators in learned helplessness

Abstract

The findings of Oakes and Curtis (1982), Tennen, Drum, Gillen, and Stanton (1982), and Tennen, Gillen, and Drum (1982) provide a challenge to learned helplessness theory's focus on cognitive mediators of the helplessness phenomenon. In response to these findings, Alloy (1982) argues that these studies do not challenge helplessness theory because they do not measure expected control and because they confuse necessary and sufficient causes of learned helplessness. Silver, Wortman, and Klos (1982) contend that these studies provide an inadequate test of the model because subjects are confronted with experiences which are unlike those in their natural environment. The present article argues that by Alloy's (1982) criteria, an adequate test of the learned helplessness model has not yet been conducted. Previous studies which measured expected control have not supported the model's predictions. Moreover, if perceived response-outcome independence is a sufficient, but not a necessary cause of learned helplessness, the model loses much of its heuristic value. In response to the argument that these studies lack ecological validity, this article clarifies the distinction between experimental realism and mundane realism. While real-world studies have discovered intriguing relations between perceptions of control, attributions, and coping with illness or victimization, they have not tested predictions of the learned helplessness model.

When Does Stress Help or Harm? The Effects of Stress Controllability and Subjective Stress Response on Stroop Performance

“…The question of specifying which aspects of controllability actively drive effects has been controversial. Some studies have suggested that differing rates of failure account completely for learned helplessness effects (Matute, 1994, 1995), while others have demonstrated that non-contingency is the crucial factor, and failure is unnecessary, in evoking learned helplessness (Oakes and Curtis, 1982; Tennen et al, 1982b; Kofta and Sedek, 1989). A third body of research suggests that these factors have additive or interactive effects on behavior (Koller and Kaplan, 1978; Tennen et al, 1982a).…”

“…Some studies have suggested that differing rates of failure account completely for learned helplessness effects (Matute, 1994, 1995), while others have demonstrated that non-contingency is the crucial factor, and failure is unnecessary, in evoking learned helplessness (Oakes and Curtis, 1982; Tennen et al, 1982b; Kofta and Sedek, 1989). A third body of research suggests that these factors have additive or interactive effects on behavior (Koller and Kaplan, 1978; Tennen et al, 1982a). In considering the results of Experiment 1, one possibility is that the ability to learn contingencies between actions and outcomes caused moderately reactive participants to respond adaptively to controllable stress, while the inability to learn contingencies eradicated this relationship for people exposed to uncontrollable stress.…”

“…Although both human and animal research suggests that the effects of controllability on cognitive function are mediated by underlying systems fundamental to learning (Maier and Watkins, 2005), the exact nature of those systems in humans is unclear. The most consistently replicated consequences of uncontrollable stress are impaired performance on novel, goal-directed learning tasks or complex tasks such as anagrams (reviews by Oakes, 1982; Tennen, 1982). Deficits on these complex tasks may have a number of sources ranging from slowed processing speed to reduced ability to direct and sustain attention.…”

Causal explanations as a risk factor for depression: Theory and evidence.

“…In a recent review, Silver, Wortman, and Klos (1982) criticized these studies on three grounds. First, the relationship between experience with uncontrollable events and subsequent deficits may be mediated by a variety of factors, not just the expectation of response-outcome independence (e.g., Frankel & Snyder, 1978;Peterson, 1978;Tennen, 1982). Second, laboratory studies of human helplessness may be subject to demand characteristics that trivialize obtained results (Orne, 1962).…”

Depression, self-esteem, and the absence of self-protective attributional biases.

“…Even studies cited in support of a depressive attributional style (e.g., Golin et al, 1981) find that depression accounts for less than 3% of the observed variance in subjects' attributions (cf. Tennen, 1982). One explanation of the recent failures to replicate a depressive attributional style turns on the nature of the BDI, the inventory we used to measure depth of depression.…”