Looking on the dark side: Rumination and cognitive-bias modification

Paula Hertel*, Nilly Mor, Chiara Ferrari, Olivia Hunt, Nupur Agrawal

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

42 Scopus citations

Abstract

To understand cognitive bases of self-reported ruminative tendencies, we examined interpretations and subsequent memories of ambiguous situations depicting opportunities for rumination. In Experiment 1, we recruited students, randomly assigned them to a distracting or ruminative concentration task, and then measured their latencies to complete fragments that resolved situational ambiguity in either a ruminative or a benign direction. Students in the ruminative task condition who previously self-identified as brooders were quicker to complete ruminative fragments. In Experiment 2, we simulated this bias to investigate its possible contribution to rumination; nonbrooding students were trained to make ruminative or benign resolutions of ambiguous situations. Ruminative training led to more negative continuations of new, potentially ruminative situations in a subsequent transfer task. Next, ruminative training also caused more negatively valenced errors in recalling the ambiguous transfer situations. Finally, after reflection about a personal experience, state-rumination scores were higher in the ruminative condition. These results establish the causal role of interpretation biases in ruminative patterns of thought.

Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)714-726
Number of pages13
JournalClinical Psychological Science
Volume2
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2014

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2014.

Keywords

  • Brooding
  • Cognitive-bias modification
  • Interpretation bias
  • Rumination

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Looking on the dark side: Rumination and cognitive-bias modification'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this