Already done!

I thought I was the one who came up with a theory of hopelessness (here and here).

Since I am feeling out of sorts today, I thought I’d write about Hopelessness. It would be purgatory for me and jerk me out of my hopeless slumber of gloom and despondency ( Don’t care whether it is grammaticaly correct or not).

On a sudden whim, I googled for Theory of Hopelessness. And this is what turned up.

Reading the following freaked me out!

The goal of the current study was to test the diathesis-stress and causal mediation components of the hopelessness theory of depression in third- and seventh-grade children. The procedure involved an initial assessment of depressive symptoms, hopelessness, and the 3 cognitive styles posited as vulnerability factors by hopelessness theory. The procedure also involved a series of 6 weekly follow up assessments in which depressive symptoms, hopelessness, and the occurrence of negative events were assessed. A depressogenic attributional style interacted with negative events to predict increases in depressive symptoms in seventh-grade children but not in third- grade children. A depressogenic inferential style Last, a depressogenic inferential style about the self interacted with negative events to predict increases in depressive symptoms in third- and seventh-grade girls but not boys. None of these interactions were mediated by hopelessness. about consequences interacted with negative events to predict increases in depressive symptoms in both third- and seventh-grade children.

(Emphasis is mine.)

via: Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

What the author of the above excerpt probably meant by the attributional style and inferential style is probably this:

  • Explanatory style is a psychological attribute that indicates how people explain to themselves why they experience a particular event, either positive or negative. Psychologists have identified three components in explanatory style:
  • Personal. People experiencing events may see themselves as the cause; that is, they have internalized the cause for the event. Example: “I always forget to make that turn” (internal) as opposed to “That turn can sure sneak up on you” (external).
    • Permanent. People may see the situation as unchangeable, e.g., “I always lose my keys” or “I never forget a face”.
    • Pervasive. People may see the situation as affecting all aspects of life, e.g., “I can’t do anything right” or “Everything I touch seems to turn to gold”.

    Via: Explanatory Style (Wikipedia)

    From the same source, comes this explanation for the Theory of Hopelessness:

    • More recently than the “learned helplessness” model which formed the theoretical basis of the original Abramson, Seligman and Teasdale statement on attributional style, Abramson, Metalsky and Alloy proposed the hopelessness theory.
    • This theory distinguishes between hopeless depression and circumscribed pessimism. It emphasizes the dimensions of stability and globality rather than internality, holding that attributions of one’s failures to stable and global causes, rather than to internal causes, is associated with hopelessness depression.
    • Hopelessness theory also emphasizes how perceived importance of a negative outcome, and perceived consequences of a negative outcome, are important as well as causal attributions in relation to clinical depression.

    Hmm.

    Surely makes my head spin.

    • Dedicated to the hope that my own Theory of Hopelessness will be posted soon…It has to be formulated first! *
    Advertisements

    One thought on “Already done!

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s