Lecture 6 +7 Flashcards
Seligman’s learned helplessness theory
- Depression results from a view that they are incapable of being agents of change in own life (perceived absence of control)
- Outcomes independent of behaviour
Abramson’s hopelessness theory
Attributions of negative events are: - Stable, - Internal, - Global Helplessness was driven not by how people perceived the relationship between actions and outcome, but by how they explained the situation / incident to themselves
Attribution style
Optimistic attribution style linked with psychological well-being; when it’s negative its stable, internal, and global
example of negative attribution style:
- I got a bad grade; I can never do anything right.
Depression
The meaning or interpretation people give to their experiences influences whether or not they will become depressed
Cognitive triad
Negative view of self
Negative view of world
Negative view of others
Basic Cognitive Model (Beck)
Situation –> Automatic thoughts –> reaction
Example:
Difficult reading material for class –> I don’t understand, I’m so stupid –> Sad, turn on TV for comfort
OR
Difficult material –> awesome! deep material –> studies hard/excited
Automatic thoughts
- Specific to situations – they come from core beliefs or cognitive schemas
- stream of positive or negative thoughts; unconscious
- NOT RANDOM*
- Surface level cognitiion
Core Beliefs/Cognitive Schemas
Depressive Schema
- Organized structures of stored information that contain individuals’ perceptions of self and others, goals, expectations and memories
- Rigid, generalizable, developed during childhood, absolute truth for the person, influence information processing
Enduring, rigid, and complex negative beliefs about the self, world, and future that are resistant to change despite the presentation of disconfirming information.
Automatic thought vs. Core Beliefs
Automatic is situation specific and come from schemas
Core beliefs/schemas are rigid and generalizable, developed in childhood
Levels of Depressotypic Cognition
- Core Beliefs/Schemas (ex: “I’m a failure”) –>
- Intermediary beliefs/assumptions (rules, attitudes, assumptions) (ex:“I must do everything right, otherwise I’m a total failure”) –>
- Automatic Thoughts (e.g., I never can do anything right)–>
- Situation (e.g. receive a bad grade) –>
- Sadness
Original Model
Adverse developmental experiences –> dysfunctional attitudes (schemas); cognitive vulnerability –> activation by stressful events –> pervasive negative cognitive bias; depression
Cognitive Distortions
All-or-nothing thinking: concrete rather than on continuum
Catastrophizing: predicting the future negatively without
considering more likely outcomes
Discounting the positive
Emotional reasoning: associating truth with the intensity of emotion
Magnification/minimization: of the negative/positive aspects of situations.
Selective Abstraction/mental filter: focus on one detail at
the expense of others.
Mind-‐reading: You believe what others are thinking and not considering other possibilities.
Personalization: attributing cause of external events
to inherent weakness or inadequacy while disregarding
contradictory evidence
STUCTURE OF CBT
- Early sessions: assessment and conceptualization; goal setting
- Middle sessions: Cognitive (and behavioral) interventions
- Late sessions: evaluation, relapse prevention
COMMON CRITICISMS OF BECK’S THEORY / THERAPY
- Very limited consideration of emotion
- Limited place for behaviors
- Therapy ignores the therapeutic alliance
STUDY: Temple-Wisconsin Cognitive Vulnerability to Depression
Retrospective:
- HR (high-risk individuals) were twice more likely to report a history of depression in the past - But no differences in rate of anxiety
- Causal direction between cognitive vulnerability to depression and lifetime depression is unclear
Prospective:
- Participants without a depression:
•HR had greater likelihood of having first episodes (later) - 17% vs. 1%
•No significant differences in risk for anxiety - 7% vs. 3%
- Participants with a depression
•HR had greater risk (more likely to have a NEW depression) -27% vs. 6%
Predictors of Relapse Lower age of onset Lifetime history of dysthymia Severity of the first episode Cognitive vulnerability is stable over time --> Did not change during episode of depression