Cited by 55Bipolar Disorder and TreatmentPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyPersonality Traits and Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Dependency and self‐criticism in bipolar and unipolar depressed women

Rosenfarb, Irwin S., Becker, Joseph, Khan, Arifulla, Mintz, Jim·1998·British Journal of Clinical Psychology

Abstract

Objectives The dependency and self-criticism scores of women with histories of either unipolar disorder (N = 74) or bipolar disorder (N = 20) or no psychiatric history (N = 24) were compared to determine the influence of state depression on these personality dimensions. Design All women completed the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire and the Beck Depression Inventory. Patients were divided into currently depressed and remitted groups. Results Currently depressed women with unipolar disorder were more self-critical and dependent than non-psychiatric controls; women with unipolar disorder whose depression remitted were more self-critical only. Women in both the depressed and remitted bipolar groups were more self-critical than controls. Depressed bipolar patients did not differ from the controls in their level of dependency; remitted bipolar patients were significantly less dependent than controls. Conclusions Dependency needs in depressed women are heavily influenced by mood state. Self-criticism appears to be a-characterological trait in both major depression and bipolar disorder. Women with bipolar disorder in remission report fewer dependency needs than women with no history of psychiatric disorder. The data provide partial support for Blatt's (1974) hypothesis that dependency and self-criticism reflect relatively stable personality dimensions in patients with a mood disorder.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.2044-8260.1998.tb01398.x

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 55

Metadata

Authors
Rosenfarb, I. S., Becker, J., Khan, A., & Mintz, J.
Affiliations
  • Alliant University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Rosenfarb, Irwin S.
Venue
British Journal of Clinical Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-11
Volume
37
Issue
4
Pages
409-414
ISSN
  • 0144-6657 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8260
OpenAlex
W2065057745
Cited by
54
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • British Journal of Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Washington
  • National Institutes of Health (5r03mh056476-02)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (62-3020)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH56476, MH 14584, T32MH014584)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
dependency, self-criticism, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, women, personality traits, depression remission, mood states, Depressive Experiences Questionnaire, Beck Depression Inventory
MeSH terms
Adult, Bipolar Disorder, Dependency, Psychological, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Middle Aged, Personality Disorders, Personality Inventory, Self Concept

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