Beck's cognitive theory of depression: A test of the diathesis‐stress and causal mediation components
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This prospective study tested the diathesis-stress and causal mediation components of Beck's (1967, 1983) cognitive theory of depression. DESIGN: In order to allow for a stringent test of the aetiological component of Beck's theory, we used a short-term longitudinal design in which participants' dysfunctional attitudes were assessed prior to the occurrence of a negative event. METHODS: In all, 136 high school seniors applying to the University of Pennsylvania completed measures of depressed mood and dysfunctional attitudes 1-8 weeks before receiving their admissions decision (Time 1). The assessment of dysfunctional attitudes was preceded by a priming task designed to activate latent depressogenic schemata. Participants also completed measures of depressed mood, negative views of the self, and negative views of the future shortly after they received their admissions decision (Time 2) and four days later (Time 3). RESULTS: Consistent with the diathesis-stress component of Beck's theory, dysfunctional attitudes predicted increases in depressed mood immediately following a negative admissions outcome (Time 2). In addition, consistent with the causal mediation component of the theory, in negative outcome students, the relationship between dysfunctional attitudes and increases in depressed mood was mediated by negative views of the future. Contrary to predictions, however, this relationship was not mediated by negative views of the self. In addition, contrary to predictions, dysfunctional attitudes did not predict enduring depressed mood after a negative outcome (Time 3). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with dysfunctional attitudes are likely to show increases in depressed mood following the occurrence of negative events. The relationship between dysfunctional attitudes and increases in depressed mood following the occurrence of negative events is mediated by negative views of the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".