Dichotomous Thinking as a Sign of Suicide Risk on the TAT
Abstract
Previous research has supported theoretical claims that dichotomous thinking may be a risk factor for suicide. However, the concept of dichotomous thinking is vague, and thus far, no measures of it have been developed. This study developed a coding scheme useful on Thematic Aperception Test (TAT; Murray, 1943) protocols and applicable to other verbal productions to refine the concept of dichotomous thinking and to assess its utility as a predictor of suicidality. Suicidal patients had a significantly elevated rate of a narrowly defined type of dichotomous thinking involving diametric or polarized possibilities. However, suicidal and nonsuicidal patients did not differ on weaker forms of dichotomous thinking involving nonexclusive or nonbinary alternatives. Suicidal patients produced shorter TAT stories than nonsuicidal patients, supporting other findings in the literature that suicidal patients tend to be cognitively and affectively "shut down." Traditionally designated "suicide cards" also yielded shorter stories but did not elicit higher rates of dichotomous thinking.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Thematic analysis by independent raters deemed the stories and poetry of suicidal individuals as highly polarized.
“Thematic analysis by independent raters also deemed the stories and poetry of suicidal individuals as highly “polarized” (Litinsky & Haslam, 1998; Wedding, 2000).”
From In an Absolute State: Elevated Use of Absolutist Words Is a Marker Specific to Anxiety, Depression, and Suicidal Ideation (2018) · cites this paper as Litinsky & Haslam, 1998
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Al-Mosaiwi, M., & Johnstone, T. (2018) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702617747074 · Cited by 304 · see citing works
How does cognitive therapy prevent relapse in residual depression? Evidence from a controlled trial.
Teasdale, J. D., Scott, J., Moore, R. G., Hayhurst, H., Pope, M., & Paykel, E. S. (2001) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.69.3.347 · Cited by 269 · see citing works
A systematic review of the relationship between rumination and suicidality
Morrison, R., & O'Connor, R. C. (2008) · Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior · doi:10.1521/suli.2008.38.5.523 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
- Authors
- Litinsky, A. M., & Haslam, N.
- ORCID
- Haslam, Nick
- Venue
- Journal of Personality Assessment
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-12
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 368-378
- ISSN
- 0022-3891 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7752
- OpenAlex
- W2096604384
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 0.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality Assessment (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
- Keywords
- dichotomous thinking, suicide risk, Thematic Apperception Test, suicide risk prediction, story length, coding scheme
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Sex Factors, Suicide, Attempted, Thinking
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