Lecture 8: Depression: Why you learn better when you are sad

1. C83MLP Mechanisms of Learning and Psychopathology Lecture 8: Depression: Why you learn better when you are sad Dr. Mark Haselgrove

2. Content of Lecture (1) What is contingency and how do we measure it? (2) Helplessness theory: Alloy & Abramson’s (1979) challenge (3) Replications of Depressive realism: Successes Failures (4) Depression↔ Realism? (5) Theories of Depressive realism - Motivation theory - Context processing

3. Suppression ratio: R(Tone) R(Tone + No Tone) 0.5 = no fear 0.0 = lots of fear What is contingency? (1) Rescorla (1968)

4. ac a + bc + d = • 0 • 10 10 • 5 • 15 5 and how do you measure it? What is contingency (1) Allan (1980) Defined contingency in terms of responses and outcomes (Instrumental learning) ΔP = P(O|R) – P(O|~R) Discussion point: Work out the ΔP for these: ΔP = 1 - 0.5 = 0.5 ΔP = 0.75 - 0.75 = 0

5. Helplessness theory Seligman (1975) Depressed people: Generalized expectancies of independence between their responses and outcomes Believe they are powerless to control the world Alloy & Abramson (1979) Depressed people should therefore underestimate the contingency between Their responses and environmental outcomes

6. Helplessness theory Alloy & Abramson (1979) Cont… • 40 discrete trials (each lasting 3 s) in which ss could press a button • (R) or not (~R). Green light was then illuminated (O) or not (~O) • - At the end of 40 trials, ss rated the control they had over the light: • (0= no control, 100= complete control) • Experiment 1: 96 undergrads, divided into depressed& non-depressed groups • Beck Depression Inventory (Beck, 1967) No difference between Depressed and Non-depressed groups Discussion point: Do these data support or challenge Seligman’s theory?

7. Helplessness theory Alloy & Abramson (1979) Still Cont… • Non-depressed people should have a generalized expectation of control • Should interfere with their judgements of non-contingencies (ΔP = 0) • Experiment 2: 64 undergrads, divided into depressed& non-depressed groups • ΔP set to zero, P(O) varied: • 0.25 (low outcome density) • 0.75(high outcome density) Do these data still challenge Seligman’s theory? • Non-depressed = Illusion of control • Depressed = Depressive realism

8. Replications: (1) Successes Lennox et al. (1990) • Replicated Alloy & Abramson, Exp 1: Looked at different patient groups: • Major depressive disorder • Schizophrenia with or without depression • Non-psychiatric patients • Two levels of ΔP (0.25, 0.75) • Again, no difference in ratings of control between groups Vasquez (1987) • ΔP and P(O) confounded by A&A and Lennox et al: • As one goes up, the other goes down: • Vasquez (Exp1) corrected for this. Held P(O) constant and varied only ΔP • Replicated A&A Exp 1 result

9. Low P(O) High P(O) Replications: (1) Successes Vasquez (1987) Cont… • Replicated A&A Exp 2 • 16 Spanish undergrads, 8 depressed, 8 non-depressed (determined by BDI) • Extends generality of Depressive-realism effect • See also Presson & Benassi (2003) for another recent replication

10. Low P(O) High P(O) Replications: (2) Failures Bryson et al. (1984) • Failure to Replicate A&A Exp 2 • 64 Male and female undergrads, • Depressed and non-depressed (again determined by BDI) Neither Depressed nor non-depressed individuals showed an illusion of control Kapci & Cramer (1999) both mood groups showed an illusion of control: ratings increased for both groups with P(O)

11. Depression ↔ Realism? Alloy & Abramson (1979) – Experiment 3 • Varied outcome valence rather than probability • Thus an outcome was made either desirable or undesirable • (rather than frequent or infrequent) • ΔP =0, P(O) = 0.5Win Condition = SS Starts with $0 • Each trial with a light = +$0.25 • Lose Condition = Ss Start with $5.00 • Each trial with no light = -$0.25 • For the lose condition….Ratings of control low for both moods • For the win condition…..Nondepressed > Depressed • An Outcome Valence effect

12. Depression ↔ Realism? Alloy, Abramson & Viscusi (1981) • Used the Outcome Valence effect • Induced elated and depressed mood states in (respectively): • Naturally depressed female students • Naturally nondepressed female students (1) Depressed state induced by ss reading negative self-referent statements: “I have had too many bad things happen in my life” “I want to go to bed and never wake up” (2) Elated state induced by ss reading positive self-referent statements: “God, I feel great!” “Things will be better and better today” (3) Control ss (depressed and nondepressed) read neutral statements: “Utah is the Beehive State”

13. Depression ↔ Realism? Alloy, Abramson & Viscusi (1981) Cont… No/ Neutral induction: Nondepressed > Depressed Naturally depressed students given elation induction gave higher ratings than non-depressed students given depression induction • Depressives made “happy” showed illusion of control • Nondepressives made “sad” showed realism Discussion point: Depression → Realism or Realism → Depression Depression → realism

14. Theories of Depressive Realism Alloy & Abramson (1979) Motivational Theory… Depressed People → Low self-esteem Non Depressed People → High(er) self-esteem Non-depressed people engage in behaviours to enhance their self esteem In particular, distort reality, in an optimistic way Thus nondepressed: Overestimate their control over desired behaviour Underestimate their control over undesired behaviour The depressed, don’t. They have a specific motivation to preserve self esteem

15. Theories of Depressive Realism Alloy & Abramson (1979) Why is depressive realism restricted to high levels of P(O)? If non-depressives overestimate the control they have over their behaviour, should see illusion of control when P(O) = 0.25

16. 3 s 14 s Theories of Depressive Realism Msetfi, Murphy, Simpson & Kornbrot (2005) The Inter-trial Interval (ITI) hypothesis A&A Experiment structure: Alan & Jenkins (1980): Removing the ITI, resulted in no outcome density bias Is there something special about the ITI….?

17. Theories of Depressive Realism Msetfi, Murphy, Simpson & Kornbrot (2005)

18. Theories of Depressive Realism Msetfi, Murphy, Simpson & Kornbrot (2005) Varied: ITI - Long (15 s), or Short (3 s) Depression - Depressed, or Not depressed Outcome density - High [P(O) = 0.75, or Low [P(O) = 0.15)

19. Theories of Depressive Realism Msetfi, Murphy, Simpson & Kornbrot (2005) What is it about depression and the ITI? Morrow & Nolen- Hoeksema (1990) – Depressed people spend time ruminating about their feelings and symptoms Perhaps attention is diverted during ITI in depressed people - Do not use information provided by the ITI, or (background context) to evaluate the relationship between noR and noO

20. Theories of Depressive Realism Msetfi, Murphy, Kornbrot & Simpson (2009) Do depressed people have a deficit in processing contextual information? AX continuous performance task: - Letters presented sequentially on a computer screen - Have to respond when they see “X” (Target) – only after “A” (Context) Look at errors on the distractor trials: A-Y and B-X If Context is well processed: A-Y errors > B-X errors If Context is poorly processed: A-Y errors < B-X errors Depressed people have a deficit in context processing

21. Theories of Depressive Realism OK, so you can explain data for ΔP = 0, what aboutΔP ≠ 0

22. Theories of Depressive Realism OK, so you can explain data for ΔP = 0, what aboutΔP ≠ 0 Is this true? Read: Msetfi, Murphy & Simpson (2007)

23. Further reading…

24. Further reading…