A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Worry and Rumination

Clinical scientists disagree about whether worry and rumination are distinct or represent a unitary construct. To inform this debate, we performed a series of meta-analyses evaluating the relationship between worry and different forms of rumination. A total of 719 effect sizes (N = 69,305) were analyzed. Worry showed a large association with global rumination and with the brooding and emotion-focused subtypes of rumination (rs = .51-.53). However, even when corrected for measurement error, the correlations did not approach unity (rho s = .57-.62). Worry showed a smaller, though still significant, association with the reflection subtype of rumination (r = .28, rho = .34). Characteristics of the study, sample, and measures moderated the worry-rumination relationship. Worry and rumination, as indexed by current self-report measures, reflect closely related but nonredundant constructs. Given that these constructs have both common and distinct features, researchers should select between them carefully and, when possible, study them together.

Automated summary

Clinical scientists discuss whether worry and rumination are distinct or represent a unitary construct. A series of meta-analyses were conducted to evaluate their relationship. The analyses showed that worry is closely related but nonredundant to different forms of rumination. Researchers should carefully select and study these constructs together.