English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

The origins of repetitive thought in rumination: Separating cognitive style from deficits in inhibitory control over memory

MPS-Authors
There are no MPG-Authors in the publication available
External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

Fawcett_2015.pdf
(Publisher version), 497KB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Fawcett, J. M., Benoit, R. G., Gagnepain, P., Salman, A., Bartholdy, S., Bradely, C., et al. (2015). The origins of repetitive thought in rumination: Separating cognitive style from deficits in inhibitory control over memory. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 47, 1-8. doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2014.10.009.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-002B-7BFE-4
Abstract
Background and objectives Rumination is a major contributor to the maintenance of affective disorders and has been linked to memory control deficits. However, ruminators often report intentionally engaging in repetitive thought due to its perceived benefits. Deliberate re-processing may lead to the appearance of a memory control deficit that is better explained as a difference in cognitive style. Methods Ninety-six undergraduate students volunteered to take part in a direct-suppression variant of the Think/No-Think paradigm after which they completed self-report measures of rumination and the degree to which they deliberately re-processed the to-be-suppressed items. Results We demonstrate a relation between rumination and impaired suppression-induced forgetting. This relation is robust even when controlling for deliberate re-processing of the to-be-suppressed items, a behavior itself related to both rumination and suppression. Therefore, whereas conscious fixation on to-be-suppressed items reduced memory suppression, it did not fully account for the relation between rumination and memory suppression. Limitations The current experiment employed a retrospective measure of deliberate re-processing in the context of an unscreened university sample; future research might therefore generalize our findings using an online measure of deliberate re-processing or within a clinical population. Conclusions We provide evidence that deliberate re-processing accounts for some – but not all – of the relation between rumination and suppression-induced forgetting. The present findings, observed in a paradigm known to engage top-down inhibitory modulation of mnemonic processing, provide the most theoretically focused evidence to date for the existence of a memory control deficit in rumination.