< Back to previous page
Project
Autobiographical memory specificity and rumination in depression: The role of self-discrepancy
Several studies have shown that depressed patients autobiographical memories (AMs) lack specific details when retrieved in response to emotional cue words (for a review, see Williams et al., 2007). This overgeneralautobiographical memory phenomenon (OGM) or reduced autobiographical memory specificity (rAMS) is not just a mood-dependent symptom of depression. Rather, it is implicated in the development and maintenance of depression. As such, it can be considered a vulnerability factor for depression. </>In the CaRFAX model </>(Williams, 2006; Williams et al., 2007), rumination is identified as one of the critical mechanisms underlying rAMS. Rumination is a coping style in which one repetitively thinks about ones depressed feelings, its causes and consequences (Nolen-Hoeksema, 1991). </></>The aim of the doctoral project was to further investigate the mechanism of rumination in AM specificity with special attention for the role of self-discrepancies.</></>
In the </>general introduction</></></>, we overview the literature on autobiographical memory, rumination and self-discrepancy. </>Experiencing a discrepancy between ones ideal and actual self is thought to induce ruminative thinking that is directed at the reduction of the experienced gap between the actual and ideal state. This in turn would then lead to a prematurely-aborted memorysearch, resulting in abstract and general memories. </>Furthermore, we propose our experiments performed in the light of the current thesis, each with their central aims and hypotheses.</></>
As a prologue to themain research line of the doctoral thesis (Chapter 1</></></>), the psychometric evaluation of the Dutch Ruminative Response Scale</></> (RSS) is presented. It is a central instrument in the current project. The RRS is a self-report scale of rumination in response to sad/depressedmood. Two studies in nonclinical samples were carried out to investigate the existence of the supposed components of rumination: brooding and reflection. Using confirmatory factor analysis, we found support for the existence of these two components.</>
The idea that self-discrepancies play a role in reduced AM specificity is investigated in five studies.Two quasi-experimental studies with high versus low discrepancy-inducing cue words were carried out in adolescents, to compare the specificity with which memories for both types of cues are being retrieved. The results showed that fewer specific memories were retrieved in response to high-discrepant cue words, compared with low-discrepant cue words (Chapter 2</></></>). Afterwards, two studies were conducted in a nonclinicaland clinical depressed population, in which a focus on self-discrepancywas experimentally induced and its impact on AM specificity was evaluated (Chapter 3</></></>). In these studies, the results failed to reveal an effect of a self-discrepancy manipulation on AMS, but in both studies, actualideal discrepancies interacted with the reflection componentof rumination to predict the change in memory specificity due to the manipulation. </></>
Finally, a prospective study in formerly depressedpatients was carried out. In Chapter 4</></></>, the idea was tested</> whether the self-discrepancy manipulation used in Chapter 3, could elicit an association between trait rumination and rAMS in formerly-depressed participants.</> Results showed that trait rumination was indeed negatively correlated with AMS after, but not before the induction. Moreover, high trait ruminating participants presented a decrease in AMS following the induction, but no such decrease was observed in low trait ruminating individuals. Furthermore, we examined the predictive value of AM specificity reactivity in response to this manipulation on depressive symptoms at follow-up in Chapter 5</></></>. In sum, </>we failed to find that activated rAMS predicted depressive symptoms at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. However, we did find that actual-ideal discrepancy is associated with concurrent depression scores and that the interaction between rumination and self-discrepancy predicted depressive symptoms at 6 monthsfollow-up.</></>
In a closing general discussion</></>, we summarizeour results and discuss our findings in the light of their theoretical and clinical implications.</></>
In the </>general introduction</></></>, we overview the literature on autobiographical memory, rumination and self-discrepancy. </>Experiencing a discrepancy between ones ideal and actual self is thought to induce ruminative thinking that is directed at the reduction of the experienced gap between the actual and ideal state. This in turn would then lead to a prematurely-aborted memorysearch, resulting in abstract and general memories. </>Furthermore, we propose our experiments performed in the light of the current thesis, each with their central aims and hypotheses.</></>
As a prologue to themain research line of the doctoral thesis (Chapter 1</></></>), the psychometric evaluation of the Dutch Ruminative Response Scale</></> (RSS) is presented. It is a central instrument in the current project. The RRS is a self-report scale of rumination in response to sad/depressedmood. Two studies in nonclinical samples were carried out to investigate the existence of the supposed components of rumination: brooding and reflection. Using confirmatory factor analysis, we found support for the existence of these two components.</>
The idea that self-discrepancies play a role in reduced AM specificity is investigated in five studies.Two quasi-experimental studies with high versus low discrepancy-inducing cue words were carried out in adolescents, to compare the specificity with which memories for both types of cues are being retrieved. The results showed that fewer specific memories were retrieved in response to high-discrepant cue words, compared with low-discrepant cue words (Chapter 2</></></>). Afterwards, two studies were conducted in a nonclinicaland clinical depressed population, in which a focus on self-discrepancywas experimentally induced and its impact on AM specificity was evaluated (Chapter 3</></></>). In these studies, the results failed to reveal an effect of a self-discrepancy manipulation on AMS, but in both studies, actualideal discrepancies interacted with the reflection componentof rumination to predict the change in memory specificity due to the manipulation. </></>
Finally, a prospective study in formerly depressedpatients was carried out. In Chapter 4</></></>, the idea was tested</> whether the self-discrepancy manipulation used in Chapter 3, could elicit an association between trait rumination and rAMS in formerly-depressed participants.</> Results showed that trait rumination was indeed negatively correlated with AMS after, but not before the induction. Moreover, high trait ruminating participants presented a decrease in AMS following the induction, but no such decrease was observed in low trait ruminating individuals. Furthermore, we examined the predictive value of AM specificity reactivity in response to this manipulation on depressive symptoms at follow-up in Chapter 5</></></>. In sum, </>we failed to find that activated rAMS predicted depressive symptoms at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. However, we did find that actual-ideal discrepancy is associated with concurrent depression scores and that the interaction between rumination and self-discrepancy predicted depressive symptoms at 6 monthsfollow-up.</></>
In a closing general discussion</></>, we summarizeour results and discuss our findings in the light of their theoretical and clinical implications.</></>
Date:1 Oct 2008 → 25 Feb 2013
Keywords:Depression
Disciplines:Biological and physiological psychology, General psychology, Other psychology and cognitive sciences
Project type:PhD project