Cited by 862Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMind wandering and attentionMindfulness and Compassion Interventions

Reflecting on rumination: Consequences, causes, mechanisms and treatment of rumination

Open access
Watkins, Edward R., Roberts, Henrietta·2020·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

We review research showing that rumination has multiple negative consequences: (a) exacerbating psychopathology by magnifying and prolonging negative mood states, interfering with problem-solving and instrumental behaviour and reducing sensitivity to changing contingencies; (b) acting as a transdiagnostic mental health vulnerability impacting anxiety, depression, psychosis, insomnia, and impulsive behaviours; (c) interfering with therapy and limiting the efficacy of psychological interventions; (d) exacerbating and maintaining physiological stress responses. The mechanisms underlying rumination are examined, and a model (H-EX-A-GO-N - Habit development, EXecutive control, Abstract processing, GOal discrepancies, Negative bias) is proposed to account for the onset and maintenance of rumination. H-EX-A-GO-N outlines how rumination results from dwelling on problematic goals developing into a learnt habit that involves the tendency to process negative information in an abstract way, particularly in the context of poor executive control and negative information-processing biases. These proximal factors integrate experimental evidence to provide a partial answer to the critical question of what maintains rumination. They constitute a pathway by which more distal biological and environmental factors increase the likelihood of rumination developing. Treatments for rumination are reviewed, with preliminary trials suggesting that psychological interventions designed to specifically target these mechanisms may be effective at reducing rumination.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2020.103573

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 406 · Cited by 862

Authors
Watkins, E. R., & Roberts, H.
Affiliations
University of Exeter (GB)
Corresponding author
Watkins, Edward R.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-04
Volume
127
Pages
103573
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3003216060
Cited by
862
References
406
Citations by year
2026: 146 · 2025: 211 · 2024: 169 · 2023: 147 · 2022: 113 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 15
FWCI
12.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Keywords
rumination, executive function, goal discrepancy, habit formation, transdiagnostic vulnerability, psychopathology, psychological intervention, physiological stress response, insomnia, depression, anxiety, psychosis, impulsivity
MeSH terms
Rumination, Cognitive, Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders, Cognition, Depression, Humans, Mental Health

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review