Cited by 39Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Research TopicsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Cross-Lagged Associations Among Ruminative Response Style, Stressors, and Depressive Symptoms in Adolescents

Calvete, Esther, Orue, Izaskun, Hankin, Benjamin L.·2015·Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

Recent models suggest that the relationships among cognitive vulnerabilities, stressors, and depression could be dynamic and bidirectional. This study investigated these transactional relationships among ruminative style, depressive symptoms, and stressors. Specifically, this study assessed rumination and stressors as predictors of depressive symptoms, depressive symptoms and rumination as predictors of stressors, and depressive symptoms and stressors as predictors of rumination. Method: A total of 1,000 adolescents (545 boys, Mean Age = 13.42 years) participated in the study. A fully cross-lagged panel design was used in which ruminative style, stressors, and depressive symptoms were assessed at three time points separated by 6 months (Time 1, Time 2, and Time 3). Results: Rumination predicted an increase of depressive symptoms consistently over time. Time 1 depressive symptoms predicted Time 2 stressors, and Time 2 depressive symptoms predicted Time 3 stressors. Finally, Time 1 stressors predicted Time 2 rumination and Time 2 depressive symptoms predicted Time 3 rumination. The findings generally supported a reciprocal model where stressors and rumination contribute to the increase of depressive symptoms, depressive symptoms contribute to generate stress, and both the occurrence of stressors and depressive symptoms worsen ruminative style.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/jscp.2015.34.3.203

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Anxiety and depression symptoms prospectively predict emotion regulation use, and emotion regulation strategies prospectively predict mindfulness.

    “literature suggesting that anxiety and depression symptoms prospectively predict emotion regulation use and that emotion regulation strategies prospectively predict mindfulness (Garland et al., 2016; Calvete, Orue, & Hankin, 2015)”

    From The conditional process model of mindfulness and emotion regulation: An empirical test (2017) · cites this paper as Calvete, Orue, & Hankin, 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Calvete, E., Orue, I., & Hankin, B. L.
Affiliations
  • Universidad de Deusto (ES)
  • University of Denver (US)
Venue
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology
Published
2015-03
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
203-220
ISSN
0736-7236 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007057102
Cited by
39
References
52
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
5.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
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
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
rumination, ruminative response style, depressive symptoms, stressors, adolescents, bidirectional relationship, transactional model, cognitive vulnerability, depression

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