A COMPARISON OF TWO COGNITIVE MODELS OF DEPRESSION WITHIN AN ATTRIBUTION THEORY FRAMEWORK.

摘要

The present study investigated the validity of the Cognitive Schema (Beck, 1967) and Universal Learned Helplessness (Abramson, Seligman, Teasdale, 1978) models of depression within an Attribution Theory framework. Nondepressives were also examined in order to test hypotheses derived from the Self-Serving Bias model (Heider, 1958). The dependent variables used were internality of attributions, and shifts in probability-of-success and self-esteem following success/failure feedback.;Unlike several previous experiments, subjects in this study were stringently classified as depressed based upon a structured clinical interview. The criteria used were the Research Diagnostic Criteria (Spitzer, Endicott, & Robins, 1978), Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (Hamilton, 1960), and Beck Depression Inventory, 1961). A success/failure task considered meaningful to subjects was selected for the present experiment based upon a pilot study.;In addition to these methodological improvements, an attempt was made to identify subtypes of depressives as depression is often thought to be a heterogeneous group. It was hypothesized that the two depression models might be depressive subtypes.;Fifty depressed and sixty-nine nondepressed undergraduates were asked to pretend that they were being interviewed for admission into a graduate school. Subjects were then randomly given success or failure ratings by a confederate, who was introduced as someone trained in areas relevant to the situation.;Support was found for the Universal Learned Helplessness model. Among depressives, there was no significant difference across feedback conditions for internality of attributions and probability-of-success shifts. For depressives classified as stable over time, self-esteem shifts were not significantly different across feedback conditions.;Support was also found for the Self-Serving Bias model. Nondepressed subjects attributed success to internal factors (ability, effort) and failure to external factors (luck, task difficulty). The self-esteem shift following failure was not significantly different from that found in the success condition. As predicted, there was a large negative probability-of-success shift following failure. A small but unexpected negative shift, however, was reported after success.;Little support was found for the Cognitive Schema model. There was no evidence for Cognitive Schema and Universal Learned Helplessness subtypes of depression.