Cited by 30Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Depressive rumination and the C957T polymorphism of the DRD2 gene

Open access
Whitmer, Anson J., Gotlib, Ian H.·2012·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Depressed individuals who ruminate have difficulties learning from punishment and suppressing task-irrelevant information. The C957T polymorphism of the DRD2 gene, which affects functioning of D2 dopamine receptors (DRD2) that are expressed predominantly in the indirect pathway of the basal ganglia, has been found to influence suppression and punishment learning. Given these associations, we examined in the present study whether depressive rumination is related to the C957T polymorphism in 317 clinically depressed individuals and 317 never-depressed control individuals. A 2 × 2 (diagnostic group ×C957T polymorphism) analysis of variance conducted on depressive rumination scores yielded a significant interaction of group and C957T: Individuals with two 957C alleles reported higher levels of depressive rumination than did individuals with one or two 957T alleles if they were depressed, but not if they were healthy. The present findings suggest that the dopaminergic system and DRD2 are related to the frequency of maladaptive rumination in depressed individuals. Thus, DRD2 may be an important target for the pharmacological treatment of depressive rumination.

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 · 10.3758/s13415-012-0112-z

Cites

33 of 33 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Whitmer, A. J., & Gotlib, I. H.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Whitmer, Anson J.
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2012-08-04
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
741-747
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
OpenAlex
W2064964376
Cited by
30
References
33
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3
FWCI
5.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH87115, MH59259, F32MH087115, R01MH059259)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
depressive rumination, DRD2 gene, dopamine D2 receptor, depression, punishment learning, dopaminergic system, genetic polymorphism
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Depression, Female, Gene Frequency, Genotype, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Polymorphism, Genetic, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Receptors, Dopamine D2, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide

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