Situational Rumination: A Method for Minimizing Retrospective Reporting Bias

Ruminative responses are cognitions and behaviors that focus people’s attention on their depressive symptoms and the possible causes of the depressed mood [1]. Substantial experimental and longitudinal research supports the theory that ruminative responses can predict a more prolonged negative mood in response to laboratory stressors, and a greater likelihood of depressive symptoms after a major life event [2]. Most assessments of individual differences in rumination have relied on self-report measures of the propensity to ruminate dispositionally. These assessments, however, may be biased. Evidence has indicated that people do not– and maybe even cannot– accurately describe their own previous behaviors and cognitions [3,4]. A substantial literature on mood-dependent shifts in recall indicates that people with a history of major depressive disorder (MDD) may be particularly biased to describe themselves in a more negative fashion [5–7], particularly for long-term recall. The goal of this study was to develop a new way of assessing rumination that would avoid biases in retrospective reporting. To do so, we assessed ruminative reactions of people to a stressor. Participants received parental criticism, which has been shown to effectively elicit negative affect [8]. Participants were asked 4–6 h later, how much they thought about that criticism (ruminated). To validate the situational rumination measure, we examined whether ruminative responses to parental criticism correlated with self-reported ruminative tendencies and with a lifetime history of depression. Participants were 92 undergraduates (61 females; mean age = 19.25, SD = 2.73). Fortyone had a history of MDD. Groups did not significantly differ on gender, ethnicity, employment status, psychiatric medications, parental depression history, or past psychotherapy. Students enrolled in Introductory Psychology completed the inventory to diagnose depression-lifetime. Students endorsing five symptoms of depression lasting, at least, 2 weeks were invited to enroll in the study. Other participants were recruited through a website. All participants, including parents, completed written informed consent. At the first session, the structured clinical interview for DSMIV was administered. Inclusion criteria were a lifetime MDD or for controls, no lifetime MDD. Exclusion criteria included current MDD or substance abuse/dependence, or current/lifetime mania, psychosis, or mood disorders secondary to a medical condition. Our interrater reliability for randomly selected audiotapes was good for both the number of symptoms per participants (ri = 0.98) and MDD diagnoses (ri = 0.97). Participants provided permission to contact his or her parent, along with a demographic measure, a treatment history questionnaire, and the Ruminative Response Scale (RRS; dispositional rumination). Then, parents were contacted via mail. If they chose to participate, they were asked to write a critical letter of, at least, 10 sentences that described their child’s concerning behavior. To homogenize letters, parents were asked to consider writing about an item from a list of common concerns for parents of collegeage children, and they were given an example letter. For ethical reasons, parents were instructed to choose a concern that had been expressed to their child. Eighty-two mothers and eight fathers wrote letters. Parents also filled out a form about their own history of MDD.