The effects of current mood and prior depressive history on self-schematic processing in children

Zupan, Brian A.; Hammen, Constance; Jaenicke, Carol

doi:10.1016/0022-0965(87)90056-7

Cited by 73 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[109] Another type of memory bias in depressed individuals is to recall more negative self-descriptive adjectives than controls (e.g., [113] ). The same occurs in depressed children (e.g., [114] ). This relatively enhanced memory for negative information has been attributed to conceptual processing of (or rumination upon) negative information.…”

Section: Information Processing Biasmentioning

confidence: 75%

What is an anxiety disorder?

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Initiated as part of the ongoing deliberation about the nosological structure of DSM, this review aims to evaluate whether the anxiety disorders share features of responding that define them and make them distinct from depressive disorders, and/or that differentiate fear disorders from anxious-misery disorders. The review covers symptom self-report as well as on-line indices of behavioral, physiological, cognitive, and neural responding in the presence of aversive stimuli. The data indicate that the anxiety disorders share self-reported symptoms of anxiety and fear; heightened anxiety and fear responding to cues that signal threat, cues that signal no threat, cues that formerly signaled threat, and contexts associated with threat; elevated stress reactivity to aversive stimuli; attentional biases to threat-relevant stimuli and threat-based appraisals of ambiguous stimuli; and elevated amygdala responses to threat-relevant stimuli. Some differences exist among anxiety disorders, and between anxiety disorders and depressive disorders. However, the differences are not fully consistent with proposed subdivisions of fear disorders vs. anxious misery disorders, and comparative data in large part are lacking. Given the high rates of comorbidity, advances in our understanding of the features of responding that are shared across vs. unique to anxiety and depressive disorders will require dimensional approaches. In summary, the extant data help to define the features of responding that are shared across anxiety disorders, but are insufficient to justify revisions to the DSM nosology at this time. Depression and Anxiety

show abstract

Section: Information Processing Biasmentioning

confidence: 75%

What is an anxiety disorder?

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 2 presents studies of information processing biases and depression among children and adolescents. Level of depression is associated with greater recall of negative information relative to positive information in youth (Bishop, Dalgleish, & Yule, 2004;Cole & Jordan, 1995;Drummond, Dritschel, Astell, O'Carroll, & Dalgleish, 2006;Rudolph, Hammen, & Burge, 1997;Taylor & Ingram, 1999;Zupan, Hammen, & Jaenicke, 1987; for null results see Dalgleish et al, 2003;and Hammen & Zupan, 1984). This association is also found among children and adolescents with a diagnosis of MDD (Neshat-Doost, Moradi, Taghavi, Yule, & Dalgleish, 2000).…”

Section: An Integrative Perspectivementioning

confidence: 93%

Empirical evidence of cognitive vulnerability for depression among children and adolescents: A cognitive science and developmental perspective

Jacobs

Reinecke

Gollan

et al. 2008

Clinical Psychology Review

187

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We summarize and integrate research on cognitive vulnerability to depression among children and adolescents. We first review prospective longitudinal studies of the most researched cognitive vulnerability factors (attributional style, dysfunctional attitudes, and self-perception) and depression among youth. We next review research on information processing biases in youth. We propose that the integration of these two literatures will result in a more adequate test of cognitive vulnerability models. Last, we outline a program of research addressing methodological, statistical, and scientific limitations in the cognitive vulnerability literature.

show abstract

“…Zupan, Hammen, and Jaenicke (1987) found that previous experiences with depression did not predict self-referent information processing beyond that predicted by current mood in an 8-to 16-year-old population. They did not fi nd any evidence for the stability of dysfunctional selfschemas after remission, perhaps due to the fact that no schema activation paradigm was used.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

Cognitive biases in depressed and non‐depressed referred youth

Timbremont

Braet

Bosmans

et al. 2008

Clin Psychology and Psychoth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined cognitive vulnerability in both depressed and non-depressed referred youngsters. Formerly depressed (FD) children and adolescents (n = 16) were compared to a currently depressed (CD) group (n = 18) on a self-referent encoding and memory task imbedded in a mood induction paradigm. In order to test the specificity of the findings to depression, the results of the FD were further compared with those of a clinical but never depressed (ND) group (n = 39) diagnosed with anxiety and/or disruptive behaviour disorders. The study confirmed the hypothesized differences between the groups in terms of self-referent encoding bias. Both the ND (p < 0.001) and FD (p < 0.001) group rated more positive words than negative words as self-descriptive while the CD endorsed a closer balance of positive and negative words (non-significant difference). No interaction effect was found for the recall task. The FD group evinced a similar memory bias than the CD group. However, also in the ND group, the number of proportional recalled positive words did not differ from the proportional recalled negative words. The findings yielded no evidence for a depression-specific information-processing bias. However, all subjects (FD, CD as well as ND) exhibited a memory bias and therefore 'clinical status' is considered as a cognitive vulnerability risk factor for developing a depressive disorder in the future.

show abstract

The effects of current mood and prior depressive history on self-schematic processing in children

Cited by 73 publications

References 21 publications

What is an anxiety disorder?

What is an anxiety disorder?

Empirical evidence of cognitive vulnerability for depression among children and adolescents: A cognitive science and developmental perspective

Cognitive biases in depressed and non‐depressed referred youth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About