Depressives' future-event schemas and the social inference process.

Reich, Darcy A.; Weary, Gifford

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1133

Cited by 14 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 53 publications

(89 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To that end, the present study focuses on the processing of information concerning future self-referent events and experiences, which has also been shown repeatedly to be negatively biased in NSD (Butler & Mathews, 1983 ;Andersen et al 1992 ;Reich & Weary, 1998).…”

Section: Cognitive Processes In Sd and Nsdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential predictions about future negative events in seasonal and non-seasonal depression

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Previous research indicates that individuals with seasonal depression (SD) do not exhibit the memory biases for negative self-referent information that characterize non-seasonal depression (NSD). The current study extended this work by examining processing of self-referent emotional information concerning potential future events in SD.Method. SD and NSD patients, along with never-depressed controls, completed a scenario-based measure of likelihood estimation for future positive and negative events happening either to the self or to another person.Results. SD patients estimated future negative events as more likely to happen to both the self and others, relative to controls. In contrast, in the NSD sample this bias was specific to self-referred material. There were no group differences for positive events.Conclusions. These data provide further evidence that the self-referent bias for processing negative information that characterizes NSD can be absent in SD, this time in the domain of future event processing.

show abstract

Section: Cognitive Processes In Sd and Nsdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential predictions about future negative events in seasonal and non-seasonal depression

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More specifically, previous research by Andersen and her colleagues (Andersen, 1990;Andersen, Spielman, & Bargh, 1992) has shown that the pessimistic future-event expectancies held by depressed students are chronically accessible and efficient and that they are applied to predictions about both the self and others; in contrast, the more positive expectancies of nondepressed students, although neither chronic nor efficient, are associated with more optimistic predictions about the self and others. Reich and Weary (1998) recently examined in two studies whether these stored knowledge structures could impact the dispositional inference process. In their research, Reich and Weary asked depressed and nondepressed participants to observe a target's relatively successful performance on a test of cognitive ability and then to make inferences about his or her general level of ability.…”

Section: Dispositional Inference Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, it is susceptible to disruption by factors that reduce the motivation or the ability to process information effortfully. Several studies, for example, have demonstrated that participants who are unmotivated or cognitively distracted (i.e., diverting attention to another task) fail to use situational information to correct their initial dispositional judgments (e.g., Gilbert et al, 1988;Reeder, 1997;Reich & Weary, 1998;Trope & Alfieri, 1997;Yost & Weary, 1996).…”

Section: Stage Models Of the Social Inference Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the current research, we explored the impact of prior behavior category information and chronic expectancies, the use of situational information, and the mediational role of behavior categorizations in the process of drawing inferences about another's ability. We especially were interested in examining the mechanisms through which chronic expectancies exert their biasing impact on dispositional inferences (Reich & Weary, 1998). Do chronic, generalized future-event expectancies guide dispositional inferences by first steering perceivers toward a particular initial interpretation of another's behavior?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Contextual Constraints and Chronic Expectancies on Behavior Categorizations and Dispositional Inferences

Weary¹,

Reich

Tobin

2001

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors examined the roles of chronic expectancies and other contextual information in the dispositional inference process within the domain of ability judgments. Prior to viewing a vid- Whenextractinginformationaboutothers'enduringdispositions from their behavior, perceivers may have access to a vast array of contextual cues, including prior information about the target, situational information, and event-outcome information. Perceivers also have at their disposal knowledge structures, such as schemas and stereotypes, as well as naïve theories about such things as the malleability of traits (Dweck, Chiu, & Hong, 1995) and trait-behavior relations (Reeder & Brewer, 1979). With so many potential influences on the social inference process, researchers are faced with the intriguing and complicated task of trying to determine how these factors interact to influence the dispositional inferences perceivers make about others.One of the most frequently rendered and consequential dispositional judgments we make about others concerns their levels of ability. In the current research, we explored the impact of prior behavior category information and chronic expectancies, the use of situational information, and the mediational role of behavior categorizations in the process of drawing inferences about another's ability. We especially were interested in examining the mechanisms through which chronic expectancies exert their biasing impact on dispositional inferences (Reich & Weary, 1998). Do chronic, generalized future-event expectancies guide dispositional inferences by first steering perceivers toward a particular initial interpretation of another's behavior? If so, are perceivers able to fully correct both their categorizations of the behavior and their dispositional inferences for the effects of such expectancies when they have the cognitive resources and motivation necessary to do so? 62

show abstract

“…Almost without exception, attribution theorists and researchers have focused on the assimilative effects of contextual information on behavior categorization and characterization processes (Gilbert et al, 1988;Krull & Erickson, 1995;Reich & Weary, 1998;Trope, 1986;Trope & Alfieri, 1997;cf. Weary & Reich, in press).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Chronic and temporary distinct expectancies as comparison standards: Automatic contrast in dispositional judgments.

Weary¹,

Tobin²,

Reich³

2001

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 4 studies, the authors examined whether making outcome expectancies distinct resulted in their use as comparison standards and, consequently, in contrastive dispositional inferences for a target's behaviors. The expectancies examined were based on either chronic future-event expectancies (Study 1) or temporary, manipulated expectancy standards (Studies 2-4). Analyses revealed that when contextual expectancies were distinct or separable from target information, participants' dispositional judgments were contrasted from them under cognitive load and overcorrected (assimilated to them) under no load. These effects were mediated by participants' behavior categorizations. Evidence suggestive of a proceduralized form of correction for task difficulty and an effortful awareness-based correction for the effects of expectancies also were found. Results are examined in light of recent models of the dispositional inference process.Over the past 40 years, social psychologists have learned a great deal about how ordinary perceivers give meaning to the observed actions of another person. Early treatments focused on the contents of perceivers' intuitive theories of action. Heider (1958), for example, proposed that perceivers believe successful enactment of purposive behavior by another is dependent, in large part, on the person's ability and the difficulty of environmental factors. Put more formally, he argued that if a person succeeds at some task, then perceivers' naive theories of action hold that that person's ability must be greater than the environmental difficulty. If the person fails (and if he or she was trying to perform the task), then Gifford Weary, Stephanie J. Tobin, and Darcy A. Reich, Department of Psychology, Ohio State University.Partial reports of the data for Studies 1 and 2 were presented at the 106th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, San Fransisco, August 1998, as part of Gifford Weary's Division 8 Presidential Address; at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, May 1999, Chicago; and at the meeting of the American Psychological Society, June 1999, Denver, Colorado. The first two studies reported herein were completed in partial fulfillment of the Stephanie J. Tobin's master's thesis under the direction of Gifford Weary. This research was supported in part by National Science Foundation Research Grant SBR-9631858 and also by National Institute of Mental Health Training Grant T32-MH19728.We thank the other members of the master's committee, Richard E. Petty and Robert M. Arkin. We also thank John A. Edwards, John Skowronski, Bill von Hippel, Leigh Ann Vaughn, and Aaron Wichman for their helpful comments on a draft of this article. Finally, we gratefully acknowledge the help of David J. Angelo throughout the conduct of the research reported in this article.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gifford Weary, Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, 142 Townshend Hall, 1885 Neil Avenue Mall, Columbus, Ohio 43210.his or her ability m...

show abstract

Depressives' future-event schemas and the social inference process.

Cited by 14 publications

References 53 publications

Differential predictions about future negative events in seasonal and non-seasonal depression

Differential predictions about future negative events in seasonal and non-seasonal depression

The Role of Contextual Constraints and Chronic Expectancies on Behavior Categorizations and Dispositional Inferences

Chronic and temporary distinct expectancies as comparison standards: Automatic contrast in dispositional judgments.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About