Literature DB >> 28499066

Perceiving social pressure not to feel negative predicts depressive symptoms in daily life.

Egon Dejonckheere1, Brock Bastian2, Eiko I Fried3, Sean C Murphy2, Peter Kuppens1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Western societies often overemphasize the pursuit of happiness, and regard negative feelings such as sadness or anxiety as maladaptive and unwanted. Despite this emphasis on happiness, the amount of people suffering from depressive complaints is remarkably high. To explain this apparent paradox, we examined whether experiencing social pressure not to feel sad or anxious could in fact contribute to depressive symptoms.
METHODS: A sample of individuals (n = 112) with elevated depression scores (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9] ≥ 10) took part in an online daily diary study in which they rated their depressive symptoms and perceived social pressure not to feel depressed or anxious for 30 consecutive days. Using multilevel VAR models, we investigated the temporal relation between this perceived social pressure and depressive symptoms to determine directionality.
RESULTS: Primary analyses consistently indicated that experiencing social pressure predicts increases in both overall severity scores and most individual symptoms of depression, but not vice versa. A set of secondary analyses, in which we adopted a network perspective on depression, confirmed these findings. Using this approach, centrality analysis revealed that perceived social pressure not to feel negative plays an instigating role in depression, reflected by the high out- and low instrength centrality of this pressure in the various depression networks.
CONCLUSIONS: Together, these findings indicate how perceived societal norms may contribute to depression, hinting at a possible malignant consequence of society's denouncement of negative emotions. Clinical implications are discussed.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cultural standard; daily diary; depression; emotional norms; reference values; social expectancies

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28499066     DOI: 10.1002/da.22653

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Depress Anxiety        ISSN: 1091-4269            Impact factor:   6.505


  9 in total

1.  Complex affect dynamics add limited information to the prediction of psychological well-being.

Authors:  Egon Dejonckheere; Merijn Mestdagh; Marlies Houben; Isa Rutten; Laura Sels; Peter Kuppens; Francis Tuerlinckx
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2019-04-15

2.  Experience sampling methodology in mental health research: new insights and technical developments.

Authors:  Inez Myin-Germeys; Zuzana Kasanova; Thomas Vaessen; Hugo Vachon; Olivia Kirtley; Wolfgang Viechtbauer; Ulrich Reininghaus
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 49.548

3.  Neuroticism may not reflect emotional variability.

Authors:  Elise K Kalokerinos; Sean C Murphy; Peter Koval; Natasha H Bailen; Geert Crombez; Tom Hollenstein; John Gleeson; Renee J Thompson; Dimitri M L Van Ryckeghem; Peter Kuppens; Brock Bastian
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  On Standardizing Within-Person Effects: Potential Problems of Global Standardization.

Authors:  Lijuan Wang; Qian Zhang; Scott E Maxwell; C S Bergeman
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2019-01-20       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Are return to work beliefs, psychological well-being and perceived health related to return-to-work intentions among women on long-term sick leave for common mental disorders? A cross-sectional study based on the theory of planned behaviour.

Authors:  Åsa Hedlund; Marja-Leena Kristofferzon; Eva Boman; Annika Nilsson
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-03-19       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Perceiving societal pressure to be happy is linked to poor well-being, especially in happy nations.

Authors:  Egon Dejonckheere; Joshua J Rhee; Peter K Baguma; Oumar Barry; Maja Becker; Michał Bilewicz; Thomas Castelain; Giulio Costantini; Girts Dimdins; Agustín Espinosa; Gillian Finchilescu; Malte Friese; Maria Cecilia Gastardo-Conaco; Angel Gómez; Roberto González; Nobuhiko Goto; Peter Halama; Camilo Hurtado-Parrado; Gabriela M Jiga-Boy; Johannes A Karl; Lindsay Novak; Liisi Ausmees; Steve Loughnan; Khairul A Mastor; Neil McLatchie; Ike E Onyishi; Muhammad Rizwan; Mark Schaller; Eleonora Serafimovska; Eunkook M Suh; William B Swann; Eddie M W Tong; Ana Torres; Rhiannon N Turner; Alexander Vinogradov; Zhechen Wang; Victoria Wai-Lan Yeung; Catherine E Amiot; Watcharaporn Boonyasiriwat; Müjde Peker; Paul A M Van Lange; Christin-Melanie Vauclair; Peter Kuppens; Brock Bastian
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Digital and physical factors influencing an individual's preventive behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic in Taiwan: A perspective based on the S-O-R model.

Authors:  Jen-Her Wu; Simon Robinson; Jing-Shiang Tsemg; Yu-Ping Hsu; Ming-Che Hsieh; Yi-Cheng Chen
Journal:  Comput Human Behav       Date:  2022-10-13

8.  The toxic effects of subjective wellbeing and potential tonics.

Authors:  Sarah Atkinson
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 4.634

9.  Results from an 18 country cross-sectional study examining experiences of nature for people with common mental health disorders.

Authors:  Michelle Tester-Jones; Mathew P White; Lewis R Elliott; Netta Weinstein; James Grellier; Theo Economou; Gregory N Bratman; Anne Cleary; Mireia Gascon; Kalevi M Korpela; Mark Nieuwenhuijsen; Aisling O'Connor; Ann Ojala; Matilda van den Bosch; Lora E Fleming
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.