1. Insight into Attributional Style: A Replication and Extension Michael T. Moore & David M. Fresco, Kent State University Insight into Attributional Style: A Replication and Extension Michael T. Moore & David M. Fresco, Kent State University ABSTRACT The current investigation attempted to replicate the work of Moore and Fresco (in press) and establish the initial psychometric properties of a purely self-report measure of insight into causal attributions, the Attributional Style Insight Scale (ASIS). A sample of 78 undergraduate participants recruited from a larger screening sample of 635 based on their self-reported attributional style. Results replicated Moore and Fresco (in press) and found that participants at risk for depression were biased in their attributional style ratings (Cohen’s [1992] d = -1.69), whereas the ratings of individuals not at risk were optimistically biased (d = 1.22). Unlike prior work, level of dysphoria did not differentiate the level of objectivity in these ratings (f =.16). INTRODUCTION The depressive realism hypothesis posits that depressed individuals, relative to their nondepressed counterparts, are more accurate in their perceptions of events (see Alloy & Abramson, 1988). Findings in support of depressive realism, however, stand in stark contrast to expectations derived from the theory underlying cognitive therapy of depression (CT; Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). The theory behind CT hypothesizes that a bias for perceiving events negatively in depressed individuals is the hallmark cognitive diathesis of Major Depressive Disorder. In addition, it predicts that elimination of this bias is the key to the alleviation of the disorder with which it is associated. Prior research (Moore & Fresco, in press) has attempted to address this theoretical paradox. However, the primary strength of the work of Moore and Fresco is in allowing the debate regarding perceptual accuracy to inform the etiology of depression by studying the accuracy with which dysphoric individuals assign causes to events in their lives. Attributional style Attributional style refers to the habitual way that individuals assign causes to events. According to the theory in which attribution style is embedded, hopelessness theory (Abramson, Metalsky, & Alloy, 1989), individuals who see negative events as arising from stable and global causes are especially vulnerable to depression in the face of negative life events. Attributional style is assessed via a self-report measure called the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ; Peterson, et al., 1982) or via content analysis of naturally occurring speech also known as the CAVE technique (Peterson et al., 1992). Moore and Fresco (in press) examined the attributional style ratings made by both dysphoric and nondysphoric participants, and how these ratings differed from objective assessments of the same materials made by trained raters. An identical comparison was made for individuals at risk for and not at risk for depression. A sample of 239 undergraduate students was collected from a larger screening sample based on their degree of relative risk for depression. Contrary to expectations derived from the depressive realism hypothesis, nondysphoric individuals exhibited less realistic attributions as compared to dysphoric individuals. In addition, nondysphoric participants were not found to possess a significant degree of attributional bias (d =.09) while dysphoric participants were found to be pessimistically biased (d = -1.05). Further, individuals at risk for depression evidenced a pessimistic bias (d = - 1.82), while individuals not at risk evidenced an optimistic bias, although to a lesser extent (d =.79). However, this result, while quite robust, required replication. This replication was the primary goal of the current investigation. INTRODUCTION The depressive realism hypothesis posits that depressed individuals, relative to their nondepressed counterparts, are more accurate in their perceptions of events (see Alloy & Abramson, 1988). Findings in support of depressive realism, however, stand in stark contrast to expectations derived from the theory underlying cognitive therapy of depression (CT; Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). The theory behind CT hypothesizes that a bias for perceiving events negatively in depressed individuals is the hallmark cognitive diathesis of Major Depressive Disorder. In addition, it predicts that elimination of this bias is the key to the alleviation of the disorder with which it is associated. Prior research (Moore & Fresco, in press) has attempted to address this theoretical paradox. However, the primary strength of the work of Moore and Fresco is in allowing the debate regarding perceptual accuracy to inform the etiology of depression by studying the accuracy with which dysphoric individuals assign causes to events in their lives. Attributional style Attributional style refers to the habitual way that individuals assign causes to events. According to the theory in which attribution style is embedded, hopelessness theory (Abramson, Metalsky, & Alloy, 1989), individuals who see negative events as arising from stable and global causes are especially vulnerable to depression in the face of negative life events. Attributional style is assessed via a self-report measure called the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ; Peterson, et al., 1982) or via content analysis of naturally occurring speech also known as the CAVE technique (Peterson et al., 1992). Moore and Fresco (in press) examined the attributional style ratings made by both dysphoric and nondysphoric participants, and how these ratings differed from objective assessments of the same materials made by trained raters. An identical comparison was made for individuals at risk for and not at risk for depression. A sample of 239 undergraduate students was collected from a larger screening sample based on their degree of relative risk for depression. Contrary to expectations derived from the depressive realism hypothesis, nondysphoric individuals exhibited less realistic attributions as compared to dysphoric individuals. In addition, nondysphoric participants were not found to possess a significant degree of attributional bias (d =.09) while dysphoric participants were found to be pessimistically biased (d = -1.05). Further, individuals at risk for depression evidenced a pessimistic bias (d = - 1.82), while individuals not at risk evidenced an optimistic bias, although to a lesser extent (d =.79). However, this result, while quite robust, required replication. This replication was the primary goal of the current investigation. METHODS Participants 65 participants screened from a sample of 635 undergraduate students 33% male, 67% female 1% Asian, 6% African American, 89% Caucasian, 1% Hispanic, 4% Other Participants ranged from 18-50 years of age (M = 19.49, SD = 3.87) Measures Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ; Peterson, et al., 1982) Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI; Beck, et al., 1996) Content Analysis of Verbatim Explanations (CAVE; Peterson, et al., 1992) DISCUSSION These findings both largely confirm the results of Moore and Fresco (in press) and do not support the depressive realism hypothesis, in addition: Individuals at risk for depression were found to be less realistic than participants not at risk, and were biased in favor of viewing events pessimistically Participants at risk for depression were found to be optimistically biased When both attributional style and depression were considered together, the effect for attributional style on realism was more robust, indicating that the depressive realism effect may be better accounted for by the association between depression and one or more of its cognitive risk factors Limitations Participants consisted of relatively high- functioning college students, resulting in uncertain generalizability to the general public The lack of other methods of assessing realism may mean that the results of this study are specific to the assessment methods employed here Future Studies Research is currently underway that attempts to replicate the current results in a treatment-seeking sample, with measures of perceptual bias not reliant on self-report that can establish the convergent validity of the CAVE methodology employed here and in Moore and Fresco (in press) RESULTS To determine if degree of realism differentiated dysphoric from nondysphoric participants and those at risk versus those not a risk for depression, Multivariate ANOVA with BDI (Low/High) and ASQ Pessimism Status (Low/High) as grouping variables and the CAVE discrepancy score as the DV were conducted and found (see Fig. 1): Nonsignificant main effect for BDI Group, F(1, 64) = 1.53, p =.22, f =.16 f =.61Significant main effect for ASQ Group, F(1, 64) = 22.21, p <.001, f =.61 Non-significant ASQ x BDI Group interaction, F(1, 64) =.46, p =.50, f =.09 Follow-Up Analysis using One-Sample T-Tests on both the High and Low Pessimism Groups individually to determine if their discrepancy score differed from 0 (no discrepancy/perfect objectivity) found: d = 1.22For the Low Pessimism Group, t(45) = 4.08, p <.001, d = 1.22 d = -1.69For the High Pessimism Group, t(18) = -3.58, p =.002, d = -1.69 REFERENCES Abramson, L. Y., Metalsky, G. I., & Alloy, L. B. (1989). Hopelessness depression: A theory-based subtype of depression. PsychologicalReview, 96, 358-372. Alloy, L. B. & Abramson, L. Y. (1988). Depressive realism: Four theoretical perspectives. In L. B. Alloy (Ed.), Cognitive processes in depression (pp. 223- 265). New York: Guilford. Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford Press. Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Manual for the BDI-II. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. Moore, M. T. & Fresco, D. M. (in press). Depressive realism and attributional style: Implications for individuals at risk for depression. Behavior Therapy. Peterson, C., Schulman, P., Castellon, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1992). The explanatory style scoring manual. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Handbook of thematic content analysis (pp. 383-392). New York: Cambridge. Peterson, C., Semmel, A., von Baeyer, C., Abramson, L.Y., Metalsky, G. I., & Seligman, M.E.P. (1982). The Attributional Style Questionnaire. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 6, 287-299. Fig. 1