Stable-Global Attributions, But Not Emotional Valence, Predict Future Depressive Symptoms and Event-Specific Inferences

Abstract

Introduction: According to the cognitive vulnerability hypothesis (Abramson et al., 1989), some people are at heightened risk for depression because they generate stable-global causal attributions for stressful events (i.e., exhibit a cognitive vulnerability). However, it remains unclear if the predictive power of cognitive vulnerability, as measured by the Cognitive Style Questionnaire (CSQ), is driven by attributions specifically or a rather a more general emotional negativity. Method: We compared the predictive power of the traditional operationalization of the Cognitive Style Questionnaire (composite score of Likert ratings of stability and globality ratings) and the emotional valence and tone of idiographic written responses (which are usually ignored in the scoring). The study used a two time point longitudinal design with a sample of 837 undergraduates in the United States. Results: Stable-global attributions, regardless of the emotional valence and tone of their idiographic written responses, predicted future depressive symptoms and event-specific inferences. Emotional valence and tone did not predict either outcome. Discussion: Results support prior theorizing that the unchangeability of causal explanations is more important than the emotional valence of the explanation.