Figure - uploaded by Tetsuya Yamamoto
Content may be subject to copyright.
Supplement Figure: The results of canonical discriminant analysis. On function 1, a distribution toward the positive direction was affected by higher Hopelessness/ Suicidality (HOP) and Rumination (RUM). Function 2 was non-significant. The size of graphics represents the number of similar survey data. As shown in this figure, the group centroids of control group and single episode group were negative direction, whereas the centroid of recurrent group was opposite direction. Therefore, the recurrent group could be distinguished by the high HOP and RUM profile.
Source publication
The present study examined cognitive vulnerability to relapses of depression by clarifying the characteristics of "cognitive reactivity" in people with recurrent major depressive episodes. Study 1-1 and 1-2 developed a Japanese version of the Leiden Index of Depression Sensitivity-Revised (LEIDS-R), which assessed cognitive reactivity, and evaluate...
Similar publications
Cognitive training designed to recalibrate maladaptive aspects of cognitive-affective processing associated with the presence of emotional disorder can deliver clinical benefits. This study examined the ability of an integrated training in self-distancing and perspective broadening (SD-PB) with respect to distressing experiences to deliver such ben...
Citations
... Numerous previous studies have reported that people with a history of depression are more likely to demonstrate cognitive biases, such as dysfunctional attitudes (6,7), biased attention (8,9), biased interpretation (10,11), and biased memory (12,13) after the induction of negative mood. While such cognitive reactivity has mainly been assessed using behavioral and subjective measures (14,15), several findings have highlighted the low sensitivity of these measurements (16,17). As such, the underlying biological mechanisms of cognitive reactivity are yet to be identified. ...
... Participants completed two questionnaires prior to the experimental task. These were the (i) Japanese version of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) (35,36) and (ii) Japanese version of the Leiden Index of Depression Sensitivity-Revised (LEIDS-R) (15,37). ...
... Participants indicated whether and how their thinking patterns change when they feel down or are experiencing a low mood. The LEIDS-R has favorable psychometric properties, including adequate internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and concurrent and predictive validity (15). The subscales of the LEIDS-R are Hopelessness/Suicidality, Acceptance/Coping, Aggression, Control/Perfectionism, Risk Avoidance, and Rumination. ...
Background: The neurophysiological mechanisms of cognitive reactivity, the primary vulnerability factor of major depressive disorder (MDD) recurrence, remain unclear in individuals with recovered MDD (rMDD). Because gamma-band responses (GBRs) can be used to measure cognitive processing, they may also be useful for elucidating the mechanisms underlying cognitive reactivity. Identifying these mechanisms may permit the development of an index for predicting and preempting MDD recurrence. Here, to identify the neurophysiological mechanisms of cognitive reactivity, we examined the characteristics of the GBRs evoked/induced by emotional words in participants with and without rMDD after inducing a negative mood.
Methods: Thirty-three healthy control participants and 18 participants with rMDD completed a lexical emotion identification task during electroencephalography along with assessments of cognitive reactivity after negative mood induction.
Results: No between-group differences were identified for the task reaction times; however, the rMDD group had significantly higher cognitive reactivity scores than did the control group. Furthermore, the power of late GBRs to positive words was significantly greater in the rMDD group, with the greater power of late GBRs being related to higher cognitive reactivity.
Limitations: Considering the population studied, our findings cannot be completely generalized to populations other than adolescents, people with rMDD, and those without a history of co-morbid disorders and early life stress.
Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the dysfunction of neural circuits related to higher-order processes like memory and attention might underlie cognitive reactivity. Altered late GBRs to positive information may be persistent biomarkers of the depression recurrence risk.
... LEIDS-R scores distinguished previously depressed individuals from never-depressed controls in at least six studies (Elgersma et al., 2015;Merens, Booij, & Van Der Does, 2008;Moulds et al., 2008;Raes, Dewulf, Van Heeringen, & Williams, 2009;Van der Does, 2002, 2005. LEIDS-R scores also differentiated between recurrently depressed patients and those with a single prior episode in two studies (Elgersma et al., 2015;Yamamoto, Yamano, Shimada, Ichikawa, & Nakaya, 2014). Furthermore, total LEIDS-R scores predicted depression vulnerability above and beyond rumination scores as measured by the Ruminative Response Scale (Moulds et al., 2008). ...
Objectives:
Cognitive reactivity (CR) to sad mood is a risk factor for major depressive disorder (MDD). CR is usually measured by assessing change on the Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale (DAS-change) after sad mood-induction. It has, however, been suggested that the versions of the DAS (A/B) are not interchangeable, impacting the reliability and validity of the change score. The Leiden Index of Depression Sensitivity-Revised (LEIDS-R) is an alternative self-report measure of CR. Studies examining the relationship between LEIDS-R and DAS-change have shown mixed results. We examined whether scores of these CR measures differed between remitted MDD and controls, the relationship between these CR measures, and the effect of order of DAS administration on DAS-change.
Design:
Cross-sectional design with two groups (remitted MDD and controls).
Methods:
Sixty-eight MDD patients remitted from ≥2 previous episodes, not taking antidepressants, and 43 never-depressed controls participated in a mood-induction and filled in the DAS-A/B in randomized order before and after mood-induction, and LEIDS-R separately.
Results:
LEIDS-R scores and pre-mood-induction DAS scores were significantly higher in remitted MDD than controls (p < .001, Cohen's d = 1.48; p = .001, Cohen's d = 0.66, respectively). DAS-change did not differ between these groups (p = .67, Cohen's d = 0.08). LEIDS-R correlated with DAS-change (r = .30, p = .042), but only in the group that filled in DAS-B before DAS-A. In remitted MDD, DAS-change was dependent on the order of DAS versions before and after mood-induction (10.6 ± 19.0 vs. -1.2 ± 10.5, for order B-A and A-B, respectively), with a significant group × order interaction (p = .012).
Conclusions:
Existing DAS versions are not interchangeable, which compromises the usefulness of mood-inductions in clinical practice. The LEIDS-R seems a valid measure of cognitive vulnerability to depression.
Practitioner points:
Clinical implications: Cognitive reactivity (CR) is a risk factor of depressive recurrence. The current measurement of CR, by assessing change on the Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale (DAS) after mood-induction, is not reliable. The Leiden Index Depression Sensitivity-Revised (LEIDS-R) is an alternative CR measure. In contrast to mood-induction, it reliably assesses depression vulnerability. The use of mood-inductions for clinical/research purposes is unnecessary.
Limitations of the study:
We were not able to examine the effect of previous treatment, which could have affected results as psychological treatments probably have differential effects on CR. Examining un-medicated patients may have led to selection of a sample not completely representative for the general MDD population. We did not administer both parallel versions of the DAS (A/B) before and after mood-induction. This might have provided better understanding of their differential sensitivity to change.
... We propose that sensitization occurs as rumination erodes positive attitudes and strengthens dysfunctional attitudes. In keeping with this idea, multiple clinical studies suggest that dysphoric elaboration is the dominant predictor of relapse/recurrence in patients with multiple previous MDD episodes (Halvorsen, Wang, Eisemann, & Waterloo, 2010), even when compared with patients with a single prior episode (Yamamoto, Yamano, Shimada, Ichikawa, & Nakaya, 2014). As self-schemas are repeatedly disrupted, dysphoric elaboration may become habitual, reducing awareness of such associations and thereby reducing opportunities to engage in self-regulation. ...
The substantial health burden associated with major depressive disorder (MDD) is a product of both its high prevalence and the significant risk of relapse, recurrence, and chronicity. Establishing recurrence vulnerability factors (VFs) could improve the long-term management of MDD by identifying the need for further intervention in seemingly recovered patients. We present a model of sensitization in depression vulnerability, with an emphasis on the integration of behavioral and neural systems accounts. Evidence suggests that VFs fall into 2 categories: dysphoric attention and dysphoric elaboration. Dysphoric attention is driven by fixation on negative life events, and is characterized behaviorally by reduced executive control, and neurally by elevated activity in the brain's salience network. Dysphoric elaboration is driven by rumination that promotes overgeneral self- and contextual appraisals, and is characterized behaviorally by dysfunctional attitudes, and neurally by elevated connectivity within normally distinct prefrontal brain networks. Although few prospective VF studies exist from which to catalogue a definitive neurobehavioral account, extant data support the value of the proposed 2-factor model. Measuring the continued presence of these 2 VFs during recovery may more accurately identify remitted patients who would benefit from targeted prophylactic intervention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
This article reviews the current trends in clinical psychological studies, published between July 2013 and June 2014. First, this article provides a brief overview of the research that was published from the “clinical” category of the 56th annual meeting of the Japanese Association of Educational Psychology, and cited characteristic keywords for each age division. Second, the author reviews the papers on “clinical psychology” that were published in six academic journals. The author found that (1) in psychological maladjustment/psychiatric symptoms, research on depression was the most common, alongside rumination, stress, and burnout ; (2) there were less studies dealing with scale development ; (3) cognitive behavior therapy, behavior analysis, and ACT (acceptance and commitment therapy) were the major approaches in intervention programs and psychotherapies.
