Automatic thoughts, cognitive distortions, dysfunctional attitudes, core beliefs, and ruminative response styles in unipolar major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder: a comparative study

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Nurgul Yesilyaprak, S. Batmaz, M. Yıldız, E. Songur, Esma Akpınar Aslan
{"title":"Automatic thoughts, cognitive distortions, dysfunctional attitudes, core beliefs, and ruminative response styles in unipolar major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder: a comparative study","authors":"Nurgul Yesilyaprak, S. Batmaz, M. Yıldız, E. Songur, Esma Akpınar Aslan","doi":"10.1080/24750573.2019.1690815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare patients with bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, who were either in an acute depressive episode or in remission, and a healthy control group on their cognitions related to depression and mania/hypomania, and on their response styles. METHODS: A total of 300 participants who presented to our outpatient psychiatry department were included in the study (100 participants with unipolar depression (DG), 100 with bipolar disorder, and 100 with no previous or current psychiatric disorder (CG)). The participants completed the Cognition Checklist (CCL), the Cognition Checklist for Mania (CCL-M-R), the Cognitive Distortions Questionnaire (CDQ), the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (DAS), the Hypomanic Attitudes and Positive Predictions Inventory (HAPPI), the Brief Core Schemas Scale (BCSS), Ruminative Response Scale (RRS), and the Responses to Positive Affect Questionnaire (RPAQ). The groups were compared with each other by one-way analysis of variance, independent samples t-test, and chi-square tests. RESULTS: The DG scored higher than the other groups on the CCL, the frequency and intensity subscales of the CDQ, the DAS, and the negative-self and negative-others subscales of the BCSS, the RRS, and on the dampening subscale of the RPAQ. The clinical groups scored higher than the CG on the scores of the relationships subscale of the CCL-M-R, the total score of the CDQ, and the HAPPI. The CG scored higher than the clinical groups on the positive-self subscale of the BCSS, and on the emotion focused positive rumination subscale. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are important in the differential diagnosis of mood disorders, and for their treatment with cognitive behavioural psychotherapy.","PeriodicalId":20847,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology","volume":"1 1","pages":"854 - 863"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24750573.2019.1690815","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare patients with bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, who were either in an acute depressive episode or in remission, and a healthy control group on their cognitions related to depression and mania/hypomania, and on their response styles. METHODS: A total of 300 participants who presented to our outpatient psychiatry department were included in the study (100 participants with unipolar depression (DG), 100 with bipolar disorder, and 100 with no previous or current psychiatric disorder (CG)). The participants completed the Cognition Checklist (CCL), the Cognition Checklist for Mania (CCL-M-R), the Cognitive Distortions Questionnaire (CDQ), the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (DAS), the Hypomanic Attitudes and Positive Predictions Inventory (HAPPI), the Brief Core Schemas Scale (BCSS), Ruminative Response Scale (RRS), and the Responses to Positive Affect Questionnaire (RPAQ). The groups were compared with each other by one-way analysis of variance, independent samples t-test, and chi-square tests. RESULTS: The DG scored higher than the other groups on the CCL, the frequency and intensity subscales of the CDQ, the DAS, and the negative-self and negative-others subscales of the BCSS, the RRS, and on the dampening subscale of the RPAQ. The clinical groups scored higher than the CG on the scores of the relationships subscale of the CCL-M-R, the total score of the CDQ, and the HAPPI. The CG scored higher than the clinical groups on the positive-self subscale of the BCSS, and on the emotion focused positive rumination subscale. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are important in the differential diagnosis of mood disorders, and for their treatment with cognitive behavioural psychotherapy.
单极重郁障碍与双相障碍的自动思维、认知扭曲、功能失调态度、核心信念和反刍反应风格的比较研究
摘要目的:我们旨在比较双相情感障碍和重度抑郁症患者(急性抑郁发作或缓解期)与健康对照组的抑郁和躁狂/轻躁狂相关认知及其反应方式。方法:共有300名到我们的门诊精神科就诊的参与者被纳入研究(100名患有单相抑郁症(DG), 100名患有双相情感障碍,100名以前或现在没有精神疾病(CG))。参与者完成了认知检查表(CCL)、躁狂认知检查表(CCL- m - r)、认知扭曲问卷(CDQ)、功能失调态度量表(DAS)、轻躁态度与积极预测量表(HAPPI)、简短核心图式量表(BCSS)、反思反应量表(RRS)和积极情绪问卷(RPAQ)。各组间比较采用单因素方差分析、独立样本t检验和卡方检验。结果:DG组在CCL、CDQ的频率和强度分量表、DAS、BCSS的负性自我和负性他人分量表、RRS和RPAQ的抑制分量表上得分高于其他组。临床组在CCL-M-R关系分量表得分、CDQ总分和HAPPI得分上均高于对照组。CG组在BCSS的积极自我分量表和情绪集中的积极反刍分量表上得分高于临床组。结论:这些发现对情绪障碍的鉴别诊断和认知行为心理治疗具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology
Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology aims to reach a national and international audience and will accept submissions from authors worldwide. It gives high priority to original studies of interest to clinicians and scientists in applied and basic neurosciences and related disciplines. Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology publishes high quality research targeted to specialists, residents and scientists in psychiatry, psychology, neurology, pharmacology, molecular biology, genetics, physiology, neurochemistry, and related sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信