Why, why, why?: Reason-giving and rumination as predictors of response to activation- and insight-oriented treatment rationales

Abstract

This study examines the relationships among the reasons a person offers for depression, the tendency to ruminate in response to depression, and reactions to activation-oriented (AO) or insight-oriented (IO) treatment rationales. Adults from the community (N=51) completed self-report measures of reason-giving and rumination and rated the credibility of, and personal reactions to, AO and IO rationales presented in written and videotape formats. Participants who gave more reasons for depression also tended to ruminate more in response to depressed mood. Reason-giving and rumination predicted lower credibility ratings and more negative personal reactions to the AO rationale. Although no relationship was found between these variables and response to the IO rationale, specific reasons were associated with different reactions to the two rationales. We discuss the roles of reason-giving and rumination in predicting responses to psychotherapies for depression.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 97 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.