Susan Nolen-Hoeksema

A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms after a natural disaster : the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake

Measures of emotional health and styles of responding to negative moods were obtained for 137 students 14 days before the Loma Prieta earthquake. A follow-up was done 10 days again 7 weeks after the earthquake to test predictions about which of the students would show the most enduring symptoms of depression and posttraumatic stress. Regression analysis showed that students who, before the earthquake, already had elevated levels of depression and stress symptoms and a ruminative style of responding to their symptoms had more depression and stress symptoms for both follow-ups. Students who were exposed to more dangerous or difficult circumstances because of the earthquake also had elevated symptom levels 10 days after the earthquake. Similarly, students who, during the 10 days after the earthquake, had more ruminations about the earthquake were still more likely to have high levels of depressive and stress symptoms 7 weeks after the earthquake.

Emotion-regulation strategies across psychopathology: A meta-analytic review.

We examined the relationships between six emotion-regulation strategies (acceptance, avoidance, problem solving, reappraisal, rumination, and suppression) and symptoms of four psychopathologies (anxiety, depression, eating, and substance-related disorders). We combined 241 effect sizes from 114 studies that examined the relationships between dispositional emotion regulation and psychopathology. We focused on dispositional emotion regulation in order to assess patterns of responding to emotion over time. First, we examined the relationship between each regulatory strategy and psychopathology across the four disorders. We found a large effect size for rumination, medium to large for avoidance, problem solving, and suppression, and small to medium for reappraisal and acceptance. These results are surprising, given the prominence of reappraisal and acceptance in treatment models, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy and acceptance-based treatments, respectively. Second, we examined the relationship between each regulatory strategy and each of the four psychopathology groups. We found that internalizing disorders were more consistently associated with regulatory strategies than externalizing disorders. Lastly, many of our analyses showed that whether the sample came from a clinical or normative population significantly moderated the relationships. This finding underscores the importance of adopting a multi-sample approach to the study of psychopathology.

The role of rumination in depressive disorders and mixed anxiety/depressive symptoms

Several studies have shown that people who engage in ruminative responses to depressive symptoms have higher levels of depressive symptoms over time, after accounting for baseline levels of depressive symptoms. The analyses reported here showed that rumination also predicted depressive disorders, including new onsets of depressive episodes. Rumination predicted chronicity of depressive disorders before accounting for the effects of baseline depressive symptoms but not after accounting for the effects of baseline depressive symptoms. Rumination also predicted anxiety symptoms and may be particularly characteristic of people with mixed anxiety/depressive symptoms.

Rumination Reconsidered: A Psychometric Analysis

In an attempt to eliminate similar item content as an alternative explanation for the relation between depression and rumination, a secondary analysis was conducted using the data from S. Nolen-Hoeksema, J. Larson, and C. Grayson (1999). After constructing a measure of rumination unconfounded with depression content, support for a two factor model of rumination was found. These analyses indicate that the 2 components, reflective pondering and brooding, differentially relate to depression in terms of predictive ability and gender difference mediation. The results presented here support the general premise of Nolen-Hoeksemas Response Styles Theory (S. Nolen-Hoeksema 1987) that rumination can contribute to more depressive symptoms and to the gender difference in depression, but suggest important refinements of the theory. Such refinements include the need to differentiate between the reflective pondering component of rumination and the brooding component in rumination research.

Sex differences in unipolar depression: Evidence and theory.

A large body of evidence indicates that women are more likely than men to show unipolar depression. Five classes of explanations for these sex differences are examined and the evidence for each class is reviewed. Not one of these explanations adequately accounts for the magnitude of the sex differences in depression. Finally, a response set explanation for the sex differences in depression is proposed. According to this explanation, men are more likely to engage in distracting behaviors that dampen their mood when depressed, but women are more likely to amplify their moods by ruminating about their depressed states and the possible causes of these states. Regardless of the initial source of a depressive episode (i.e., biological or psychological) mens more active responses to their negative moods may be more adaptive on average than womens less active, more ruminative responses. The epidemiology of a disorder can provide important clues to its etiology. When a disorder only strikes persons from one geographical region, one social class, or one gender, we can ask what characteristics of the vulnerable group might be making its members vulnerable. A frequent finding in epidemiological studies of mental disorders is that women are more prone to unipolar affective disorders than are men (Boyd & Weissman, 1981; Weissman & Klerman, 1977). A number of different explanations have been proposed to account for womens greater vulnerability to depression. Previous reviews of these explanations (e.g., Weissman & Klerman, 1977) have been quite brief and uncritical. In this article, the evidence for sex differences in unipolar depression first is summarized, then the most prominent explanations proposed for these sex differences are discussed in detail. These explanations include those attributing the differences to the response biases of subjects, as well as biological, psychoanalytic, sex role, and learned helplessness explanations. Although most of the proposed explanations for sex differences in depression have received some empirical support, not one of them has been definitively supported and not one as yet accounts for the magnitude of sex differences in depression. In the final section of this article it is suggested that differences in the ways that men and women respond to their own depressive episodes, whatever the origin of these episodes, may be an important source of the sex differences observed in depression.

Explaining the gender difference in depressive symptoms.

It was hypothesized that women are more vulnerable to depressive symptoms than men because they are more likely to experience chronic negative circumstances (or strain), to have a low sense of mastery, and to engage in ruminative coping. The hypotheses were tested in a 2-wave study of approximately 1,100 community-based adults who were 25 to 75 years old. Chronic strain, low mastery, and rumination were each more common in women than in men and mediated the gender difference in depressive symptoms. Rumination amplified the effects of mastery and, to some extent, chronic strain on depressive symptoms. In addition, chronic strain and rumination had reciprocal effects on each other over time, and low mastery also contributed to more rumination. Finally, depressive symptoms contributed to more rumination and less mastery over time.

Gender Differences in Depression

From early adolescence through adulthood, women are twice as likely as men to experience depression. Many different explanations for this gender difference in depression have been offered, but none seems to fully explain it. Recent research has focused on gender differences in stress responses, and in exposure to certain stressors. I review this research and describe how gender differences in stress experiences and stress reactivity may interact to create womens greater vulnerability to depression.

Response styles and the duration of episodes of depressed mood.

We examined the relationship between ruminative and distracting styles of responding to depressed mood and the duration of mood. Seventy-nine subjects kept accounts of their moods and responses to their moods for 30 consecutive days. The majority of subjects (83%) showed consistent styles of responding to depressed mood. Regression analyses suggested that the more ruminative responses subjects engaged in, the longer their periods of depressed mood, even after taking into account the initial severity of the mood. In addition, women were more likely than men to have a ruminative response style and on some measures to have more severe and long-lasting periods of depression.

Ruminative Coping With Depressed Mood Following Loss

In a longitudinal study of 253 bereaved adults, people with poorer social support, more concurrent stressors, and higher levels of postloss depression reported more rumination than people with better social support, fewer stressors, and lower initial depression levels. Women reported more rumination than men. People with a ruminative style at 1 month were more likely to have a pessimistic outlook at 1 month, which was associated with higher depression levels at 6 months. People with a more ruminative style were more depressed at 6 months, even after controlling for initial depression levels, social support, concurrent stressors, gender, and pessimism. Additional stressors and high depression scores at 1 month were also associated with higher levels of depression at 6 months.

Effects of self-focused rumination on negative thinking and interpersonal problem solving.

Hypotheses about the effects of self-focused rumination on interpretations of events and interpersonal problem solving were tested in 3 studies with dysphoric and nondysphoric participants. Study 1 supported the hypothesis that dysphoric participants induced to ruminatively self-focus on their feelings and personal characteristics would endorse more negative, biased interpretations of hypothetical situations than dysphoric participants induced to distract themselves from their mood, or nondysphoric participants. Study 2 showed that dysphoric participants who ruminated were more pessimistic about positive events in their future than the other 3 groups. Study 3 showed that dysphoric ruminating participants generated less effective solutions to interpersonal problems than the other 3 groups. In Studies 1 and 3, dysphoric ruminating participants also offered the most pessimistic explanations for interpersonal problems and hypothetical negative events. In all 3 studies, dysphoric participants who distracted were as optimistic and effective in solving problems as non-dysphoric participants.