4.4 Review

Don't [ruminate], be happy: A cognitive perspective linking depression and anhedonia

期刊

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW
卷 101, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102255

关键词

Rumination; Emotion regulation; Working memory; Reinforcement learning; Depression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Anhedonia and rumination are key features of depression, yet they have often been studied separately. In this paper, we argue that by examining the relationship between cognitive constructs and deficits in positive affect, we can better understand anhedonia in depression and improve prevention and intervention efforts.
Anhedonia, a lack of pleasure in things an individual once enjoyed, and rumination, the process of perseverative and repetitive attention to specific thoughts, are hallmark features of depression. Though these both contribute to the same debilitating disorder, they have often been studied independently and through different theoretical lenses (e.g., biological vs. cognitive). Cognitive theories and research on rumination have largely focused on understanding negative affect in depression with much less focus on the etiology and maintenance of anhedonia. In this paper, we argue that by examining the relation between cognitive constructs and deficits in positive affect, we may better understand anhedonia in depression thereby improving prevention and intervention efforts. We review the extant literature on cognitive deficits in depression and discuss how these dysfunctions may not only lead to sustained negative affect but, importantly, interfere with an ability to attend to social and environmental cues that could restore positive affect. Specifically, we discuss how rumination is associated to deficits in working memory and propose that these deficits in working memory may contribute to anhedonia in depression. We further argue that analytical approaches such as computational modeling are needed to study these questions and, finally, discuss implications for treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据