BACKGROUND: Although most research suggests that minor depression is part of a depression continuum, conflicting results have also been found. Moreover, little is known about dysfunctional thinking in minor depression and how this varies along the continuum. Especially, research on the form of dysfunctional thinking (ie, extreme responding) is lacking. We have addressed these issues by reporting results from a large community sample. METHODS: Demographic, clinical, and cognitive factors (ie, content and form of dysfunctional thinking) were compared between minor depression (ie, 2-4 symptoms), major depression with 5 to 6 symptoms, and major depression with 7 to 9 symptoms. A large community sample (N = 1129) was used. Differences between the 3 subgroups were examined as well as linear relations between number of symptoms and factors marking the severity. RESULTS: Most demographic variables did not distinguish the 3 depression status categories from each other. Clinical and cognitive factors acted in synchrony with the depression continuum. CONCLUSIONS: Minor depression should be considered as part of continuum together with major depression. Not only the content but also the form of dysfunctional thinking seems to play a major role in depression. Extreme positive responding is more prominent in mild depression, whereas more severely depressed individuals have a general tendency toward extreme negative responding. This finding, if replicated, may have important implications for the cognitive theory of depression. 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Although most research suggests that minor depression is part of a depression continuum, conflicting results have also been found. Moreover, little is known about dysfunctional thinking in minor depression and how this varies along the continuum. Especially, research on the form of dysfunctional thinking (ie, extreme responding) is lacking. We have addressed these issues by reporting results from a large community sample. METHODS: Demographic, clinical, and cognitive factors (ie, content and form of dysfunctional thinking) were compared between minor depression (ie, 2-4 symptoms), major depression with 5 to 6 symptoms, and major depression with 7 to 9 symptoms. A large community sample (N = 1129) was used. Differences between the 3 subgroups were examined as well as linear relations between number of symptoms and factors marking the severity. RESULTS: Most demographic variables did not distinguish the 3 depression status categories from each other. Clinical and cognitive factors acted in synchrony with the depression continuum. CONCLUSIONS:Minor depression should be considered as part of continuum together with major depression. Not only the content but also the form of dysfunctional thinking seems to play a major role in depression. Extreme positive responding is more prominent in mild depression, whereas more severely depressed individuals have a general tendency toward extreme negative responding. This finding, if replicated, may have important implications for the cognitive theory of depression. 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: J W Hwang; S C Xin; Y M Ou; W Y Zhang; Y L Liang; J Chen; X Q Yang; X Y Chen; T W Guo; X J Yang; W H Ma; J Li; B C Zhao; Y Tu; J Kong Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Benjamin W Van Voorhees; Nicholas Mahoney; Rina Mazo; Alinne Z Barrera; Christopher P Siemer; Tracy R G Gladstone; Ricardo F Muñoz Journal: Psychiatr Clin North Am Date: 2011-03
Authors: Nese Direk; Stephanie Williams; Jennifer A Smith; Stephan Ripke; Tracy Air; Azmeraw T Amare; Najaf Amin; Bernhard T Baune; David A Bennett; Douglas H R Blackwood; Dorret Boomsma; Gerome Breen; Henriette N Buttenschøn; Enda M Byrne; Anders D Børglum; Enrique Castelao; Sven Cichon; Toni-Kim Clarke; Marilyn C Cornelis; Udo Dannlowski; Philip L De Jager; Ayse Demirkan; Enrico Domenici; Cornelia M van Duijn; Erin C Dunn; Johan G Eriksson; Tonu Esko; Jessica D Faul; Luigi Ferrucci; Myriam Fornage; Eco de Geus; Michael Gill; Scott D Gordon; Hans Jörgen Grabe; Gerard van Grootheest; Steven P Hamilton; Catharina A Hartman; Andrew C Heath; Karin Hek; Albert Hofman; Georg Homuth; Carsten Horn; Jouke Jan Hottenga; Sharon L R Kardia; Stefan Kloiber; Karestan Koenen; Zoltán Kutalik; Karl-Heinz Ladwig; Jari Lahti; Douglas F Levinson; Cathryn M Lewis; Glyn Lewis; Qingqin S Li; David J Llewellyn; Susanne Lucae; Kathryn L Lunetta; Donald J MacIntyre; Pamela Madden; Nicholas G Martin; Andrew M McIntosh; Andres Metspalu; Yuri Milaneschi; Grant W Montgomery; Ole Mors; Thomas H Mosley; Joanne M Murabito; Bertram Müller-Myhsok; Markus M Nöthen; Dale R Nyholt; Michael C O'Donovan; Brenda W Penninx; Michele L Pergadia; Roy Perlis; James B Potash; Martin Preisig; Shaun M Purcell; Jorge A Quiroz; Katri Räikkönen; John P Rice; Marcella Rietschel; Margarita Rivera; Thomas G Schulze; Jianxin Shi; Stanley Shyn; Grant C Sinnamon; Johannes H Smit; Jordan W Smoller; Harold Snieder; Toshiko Tanaka; Katherine E Tansey; Alexander Teumer; Rudolf Uher; Daniel Umbricht; Sandra Van der Auwera; Erin B Ware; David R Weir; Myrna M Weissman; Gonneke Willemsen; Jingyun Yang; Wei Zhao; Henning Tiemeier; Patrick F Sullivan Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2016-12-08 Impact factor: 13.382