Cited by 22Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Research TopicsMind wandering and attention

Multiple paths to rumination within a network analytical framework

Open access
Tamm, Gerly, Koster, Ernst H. W., Hoorelbeke, Kristof·2024·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Theories of rumination have proposed different psychological factors to place one at risk for repetitive negative thinking. A comprehensive empirical test that captures the most relevant contributors to rumination is lacking. Building on influential self-regulatory and metacognitive frameworks, we modeled how key constructs in this context relate to ruminative thinking. 498 participants completed online questionnaires including indicators of rumination, metacognition, promotion goal orientation, effortful control, and depression. We estimated regularized partial correlation networks to investigate unique associations between the different constructs and followed these analyses up with directed acyclic graphs to identify potential pathways towards rumination. Results demonstrated that: (1) both self-regulatory and metacognitive factors were directly linked to rumination, amongst these were (2) positive beliefs, negative beliefs about uncontrollability and harm, cognitive self-consciousness, depression, effortful control, perfectionism, and (lack of) cognitive confidence, and (3) we identified multiple directed pathways, suggesting three direct contributors to rumination while controlling for the influence of all other variables: diminished effortful control, positive beliefs, and cognitive self-consciousness. This study is the first to comprehensively assess metacognitive and self-regulatory frameworks of rumination in a data-driven manner. Our findings suggest that there are multiple pathways towards rumination, which should be incorporated in clinical case conceptualization of rumination and related disorders.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-024-61469-6

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Anxiety and rumination are dynamically and reciprocally related rather than strictly ordered.

    “growing evidence suggests that anxiety and rumination are likely dynamically and reciprocally related (McLaughlin & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2011; Tamm et al., 2024) rather than strictly ordered.”

    From Mindfulness and rumination: stress pathways for caregivers of persons living with dementia. (2026) · cites this paper as Tamm et al., 2024

    The Discussion’s ‘Limitations and future directions’ section says the study focused on depression-related variables rather than anxiety and suggests examining worry in the context of anxiety in future work. The passages on reciprocal links and alternative directionality concern rumination and other cognitive variables, not anxiety and rumination. A search for anxiety–rumination reciprocity found no passage addressing the claimed relationship. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [13]Martin LL Tesser A Uleman JS Bargh JA Toward a motivational and structural theory of ruminative thought Unintended Thought 1989 The Guilford Press 306 326
  2. [14]Martin LL Tesser A Striving and Feeling: Interactions Among Goals, Affect, and Self-regulation 1996 Psychology Press
  3. [50]Pearl J Causality 2009 Cambridge University Press
  4. [80]Epskamp S Cramer AOJ Waldorp LJ Schmittmann VD Borsboom D qgraph: Network visualizations of relationships in psychometric data J. Stat. Softw. 2012 48 1 18 10.18637/jss.v048.i04 · DOI
  5. [82]Foygel R Drton M Extended Bayesian information criteria for Gaussian graphical models Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2010 23 2020 2028

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tamm, G., Koster, E. H. W., & Hoorelbeke, K.
Affiliations
Ghent University (BE)
Corresponding author
Tamm, Gerly
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2024-05-13
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
10874-10874
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4396871319
Cited by
22
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2
FWCI
8.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (12J9722N)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
Keywords
rumination, repetitive negative thinking, metacognition, self-regulation, effortful control, depression, perfectionism, cognitive self-consciousness, cognitive confidence, directed acyclic graphs, partial correlation networks
MeSH terms
Metacognition, Rumination, Cognitive, Adolescent, Adult, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Thinking, Young Adult

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