Cited by 29Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlMental Health Research Topics

Moderating effects of the valence of social interaction on the dysfunctional consequences of perseverative cognition: an ecological study in major depression and social anxiety disorder

Bailey, T., Shahabi, L., Tarvainen, M., Shapiro, D., Ottaviani, C.·2019·Anxiety, Stress, & Coping

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Major depression disorder (MDD) and social anxiety disorder (SAD) are characterized by the use of perseverative cognition (PC) as a dysfunctional coping strategy. We sought to investigate the dysfunctional physiological and psychological consequences of PC and how the valence of social interactions moderates such consequences in these psychopathological conditions. DESIGN/METHODS: The study combined 24-hour heart rate variability (HRV) and ecological momentary assessments in 48 individuals with MDD, SAD, and sex-matched controls. RESULTS: In all participants, PC was associated with mood worsening and reduced ability of the parasympathetic nervous system, mainly the vagus, to inhibit sympathetic arousal (i.e., reduced HRV). Individuals with SAD had the highest frequency of daily PC, while those with MDD reported that PC interfered more with their ongoing activities. In SAD, daily PC was associated with significantly lower HRV after negative social interactions. Individuals with MDD reported higher levels of sadness during PC irrespective of the valence of the preceding social interaction but higher levels of anxiety and efforts to inhibit PC following positive interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the need to account for important moderators like the valence of social interaction when looking at the physiological consequences of maladaptive emotion regulation strategies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10615806.2019.1570821

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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 66 · Cited by 29

Authors
Bailey, T., Shahabi, L., Tarvainen, M., Shapiro, D., & Ottaviani, C.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Eastern Finland (FI)
  • Fondazione Santa Lucia (IT)
Corresponding author
Ottaviani, C.
Venue
Anxiety, Stress, & Coping
Published
2019-01-22
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
179-195
ISSN
  • 1061-5806 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-2205
OpenAlex
W2914087876
Cited by
29
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Anxiety Stress & Coping (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministry of Health
  • Ministero della Salute (GR2010-2312442, GR2011-02348232)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
perseverative cognition, major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, heart rate variability, parasympathetic nervous system, vagus nerve, emotion regulation, maladaptive coping, negative social interactions, positive social interaction, ecological momentary assessment
MeSH terms
Phobia, Social, Rumination, Cognitive, Adult, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Case-Control Studies

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