Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

DOI 10.1007/s10608-006-9067-0
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Contributions of the Cognitive Style Questionnaire

and the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale to Measuring
Cognitive Vulnerability to Depression
J. M. Oliver Sarah L. Murphy Daniel R. Ferland
Michael J. Ross

Published online: 10 October 2006

Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Abstract The first objective of this study was to separate the contributions of the
Cognitive Style Questionnaire (CSQ) and the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (DAS) to
maladaptive cognitive patterns in their relations to symptoms of depression and their
potential developmental origins: emotional maltreatment, parents typical feedback
styles, and parents dysfunctional attitudes regarding their offspring. Other objectives
were to examine these relations in the context of symptoms of anxiety and to learn
whether selected aspects of the Cognitive Vulnerability to Depression Project (CVD
Project; Alloy, & Abramson, 1999) would generalize to a distinctive sample (n = 98).
The same relations between the DAS and the CSQ and depression and developmental
origins emerged as in the CVD Project, but relations with the DAS were somewhat
more robust.
Keywords Cognitive vulnerability Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire Abuse Development

Introduction
Cognitive vulnerability to depression may be defined as a trait-like tendency to
interpret information in negative and distorted ways in the face of subjectively perceived adversity. It has been suggested that this cognitive vulnerability may be
We use the generic term depression to apply to both diagnoses and symptoms of depression. We
specify diagnoses and/or symptoms as required by the context.
J. M. Oliver D. R. Ferland M. J. Ross (&)
Department of Psychology, Saint Louis University, 221 N. Grand Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63103,
USA
e-mail: rossmj@slu.edu
Present Address:
S. L. Murphy
Learning Point Associates, Inc., Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement,
1825 Connecticut Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20009, USA

123

52

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

acquired through early negative experience.1 It is important because it is hypothesized

to be a risk factor for depression but also potentially to be modifiable through
intervention.
Cognitive vulnerability to depression has a well-developed history in the areas of both
theory and research (cf. Ingram, Miranda, & Segal, 1998). A recent broad stream of
research began with the Cognitive Vulnerability to Depression Project (CVD Project;
Alloy & Abramson, 1999; Alloy et al., 2001). The CVD Project focused primarily on two
vulnerability-stress theories of depression: hopelessness theory (HT; Abramson,
Metalsky, & Alloy, 1989) and Becks theory (BT; Beck, 1967, 1987). HT construes the
vulnerability component as negative cognitive style, as operationalized by the Cognitive
Style Questionnaire (CSQ; Alloy et al., 2000), whereas BT construes the vulnerability
component as dysfunctional attitudes as operationalized by the Dysfunctional Attitude
Scale (DAS; Weissman, 1980; Weissman & Beck, 1978). Following Haeffel et al. (2003),
we will refer to these two constructions as maladaptive cognitive patterns, or MCPs.
Recently, research on MCPs has been augmented by investigations of their developmental origins (Alloy et al., 2001; Gibb et al., 2001), as well as by partial extensions and
replications (Haeffel et al., 2003; Hankin, Abramson, Miller, & Haeffel, 2004).
This recent line of research has provided a growing body of evidence to support three
important hypotheses about cognitive vulnerability to depression. The first hypothesis is
that cognitive vulnerability, both alone and in combination with life stressors, is a risk
factor for depression. The second hypothesis is that MCPs are a risk factor specific to
depression, rather than to other disorders or conditions. The third hypothesis is that some
origins of MCPs lie within the developmental period and consist of childhood maltreatment, particularly childhood emotional maltreatment and negative parental feedback.
The foremost purposes of the CVD Project were to test the hypotheses that (1) MCPs
are a risk factor for depression, whether considered as diagnoses, the hopelessness
subtype of depression, or symptoms, and (2) MCPs are a risk factor specifically for
depression rather than for other Axis I disorders, in particular anxiety disorders. In the
CVD Project, Alloy et al. (2000) used a behavioral high-risk design, comparing those at
high and low risk in terms of MCPs on depression both retrospectively and prospectively. In order to provide the strongest possible test of their major hypothesis, they
construed MCPs as high risk status on both negative cognitive style (operationalized by
the CSQ) and dysfunctional attitudes (operationalized by the DAS) with potential
participants restricted to those who scored at the extremes (in the highest, or most
negative, quartiles simultaneously; and in the lowest, or most positive, quartiles simultaneously) on both the CSQ and the DAS. Additionally, potential subjects were
restricted to those with no current Axis I diagnosis, thus reducing the probability of
detecting subsequent and previous depression that was secondary to another Axis I
disorder (e.g., anxiety disorder).
In the CVD Project, Alloy et al. (2000) found that the composite MCP defined by
joint risk on negative cognitive style and dysfunctional attitudes was a significant risk
factor for depression both retrospectively and prospectively. They also found that the
composite MCP was a risk factor specific to depression and not to any other Axis I
disorder. No attempt was made to separate the contributions to MCPs made by the CSQ
and the DAS.

For a review of possible antecedents of cognitive vulnerability to depression, see Rose and Abramson
(1992).

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

53

Further empirical support for the hypotheses that MCPs are a risk factor for
depression, and specific to depression, has been yielded by Haeffel et al. (2003) in a
partial replication and extension. Haeffel et al. departed from the CVD Project in not
selecting prospective participants on the basis of their degree of risk on MCPs; rather,
participants were assessed on the CSQ and the DAS but were excluded from study
only if they had a current diagnosis of depression. Haeffel et al. conducted a retrospective longitudinal study by interviewing participants to determine their lifetime
history of diagnoses of depression and other Axis I disorders. Haeffel et al. separated
the potential contributions of the CSQ and the DAS by considering scores on the
CSQ and the DAS as separate, independent predictors. Haeffel et al. found that the
CSQ, but not the DAS, was a significant retrospective predictor of lifetime history of
depressive diagnoses.
Hankin et al. (2004) provided further evidence to support the hypotheses that
MCPs are a risk factor for depression and are specific to depression by conducting
three prospective longitudinal studies. Hankin et al. also departed from the CVD
Project in including potential participants regardless of their standing on the CSQ
and the DAS. In their findings, MCPs in combination with stressors were a risk
factor for depression as symptoms and as diagnoses; as the hopelessness subtype of
depression; and as the anhedonic component of the tripartite model of depression
and anxiety (Clark & Watson, 1991). Further, MCPs were a risk factor specific to
depression and did not confer increased risk for any other Axis I disorder, most
especially not to anxiety or substance use disorders. Hankin et al.s design was
addressed specifically to separating the contributions of the CSQ and the DAS, but
their findings did not indicate that one measure was superior to another in predicting
future depression.
The hypothesis that significant origins of cognitive vulnerability to depression lie
within the developmental period in negative experience, specifically in maltreatment
and especially in emotional maltreatment and negative feedback from caregivers, is
common to HT and to BT, but has been articulated more specifically in an extension
of HT (Rose & Abramson, 1992). Emotional maltreatment spans a broad range of
caregiver omissions (such as failure to express affection) and commissions (such as
expressions of rejection and hostility and threats). Negative parental feedback
consists of parental statements of negative interpretations of stressors befalling the
offspring, interpretations attributing stressors to stable and global causes, and anticipating negative consequences of the event. Rose and Abramsons extension of HT
specifies that the etiological chain in the development of depression begins with the
distal factor of adverse socialization, including childhood emotional maltreatment and
negative parental feedback, and progresses to negative cognitive style as the more
proximal factor mediating the link between childhood adverse socialization and
depression. Gibb, Alloy, Abramson and their collaborators (see Gibb, 2002 for a
review) have presented considerable evidence to support the hypotheses that child
emotional maltreatment is associated with depression; that childhood emotional
maltreatment not only is associated with but precedes negative cognitive style; and
that negative cognitive style mediates the association between child emotional maltreatment and depression initially through the CVD Project (Gibb et al., 2001) and
subsequently in two replications and extensions (Gibb, Alloy, & Abramson, 2003;
Gibb, Alloy, Abramson, & Marx, 2003). Additionally, data from the CVD Project
(Alloy et al., 2001; Crossfield, Alloy, Gibb, & Abramson, 2002) provides support for

123

54

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

the hypothesis that negative parental feedback is associated with negative cognitive
style and subsequent depression.
It seems important to consider the potential impact on participants responses not
only of symptoms of depression, as has been done in some previous research (Alloy
et al., 2000; Haeffel et al., 2003; Hankin et al., 2004), but also of symptoms of
anxiety.2 Since symptoms of depression and anxiety are highly comorbid (for a
discussion, see Haeffel et al., 2003), it is probable that participants with symptoms of
depression will have symptoms of anxiety and vice versa. Becks superordinate
theory of the role of cognitive vulnerability in psychopathology generally and his
theory of the role of cognitive factors in anxiety specifically would posit that current
anxiety would activate pre-existing vulnerability schemas related to threat and that
participants would process any current information, including a battery of measures
in a research protocol, using any such activated pre-existing schemas related to
threat. The dual factors of (1) comorbidity of depression and anxiety and (2) Becks
hypothesized influence of anxiety on responses suggest that the impact of symptoms
of anxiety on relations among MCPs, depression, and potential developmental origins
merits further examination.
To summarize, considerable research findings exist to support the hypotheses that
MCPs (in the form of negative cognitive style and dysfunctional attitudes) constitute a
risk factor that is specific to depression; that cognitive vulnerability is not a risk factor
for anxiety; and that two of the origins of cognitive vulnerability lie in childhood
emotional maltreatment and negative parental feedback. However, some characteristics
of MCPs remain relatively less studied, in particular the relative contributions to MCPs
made by the CSQ and the DAS and the relations between MCPs, depression, and
developmental antecedents considered in the context of anxiety as a concomitant.
Consequently, the first objective of the present study was to separate and examine
the relative contributions of negative cognitive style (as operationalized by the CSQ)
versus dysfunctional attitudes (as operationalized by the DAS) in presence of
depressive symptomatology. The second objective was to examine developmental
origins of depression, specifically childhood emotional maltreatment and negative
parental feedback. Third, the present study also sought to examine relations among
MCPs (i.e., CSQ, DAS), depression, and developmental origins in the context of
anxiety. Finally, this study used participants who apparently differed from participants previously used and sought to characterize them carefully for the sake of
comparison with previous investigations.

Method
Design
The present investigation was cross-sectional; thus it addressed MCPs not as mediating
causal factors but in terms of what Ingram et al. (1998) have termed its concomitants.
Put another way, relations among the two measures of MCPs, depression, and potential
developmental origins must be considered as predictors in the statistical rather than in
the temporal sense.
2

As with depression, we use the generic term anxiety to apply to both diagnoses and symptoms of
anxiety. We specify diagnoses and/or symptoms as required by the context.

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

55

Participants
Participants were 98 undergraduate students at a private, midsize, Catholic university in
the Midwest and their parents drawn from an initial pool on the basis of their scores on
measures of MCPs and the willingness of their parents to participate in the study. The
initial pool consisted of 283 undergraduate volunteers from both introductory and
upper-level courses in Psychology. In the initial pool from which risk groups were
selected, the DAS and the CSQ were positively but moderately correlated (r = .34,
P < .025). Following the CVD Project, we selected all potential participants scoring in
the highest and lowest quartiles on the CSQ and the DAS, respectively;3 departing from
the CVD Project, we considered eligibility for participation on the basis of each measure separately rather than applied jointly. Cut-points applied to select the four groups
were as follows: High Risk CSQ group, 4.46; Low Risk CSQ group, 3.29; High Risk
DAS group, 3.50; Low Risk DAS group, 2.53. Using the CSQ and the DAS as separate
risk factors led to the selection of 171 potential participants. Because the CSQ and the
DAS were treated independently rather than conjointly, however, many potential
participants were retained who scored in the middle quartiles on one of the measures
but not the other. Of the 171 potential participants, 98 offspring-parent families,
comprising four risk groups (High Risk CSQ, High Risk DAS, Low Risk CSQ, and Low
Risk DAS), completed their participation. Because the DAS and the CSQ were positively correlated, some participants belonged to more than one group, so the total N
across all four subsamples is greater than the number of participants. Families consisted
of 68 triads of a student, mother and father; 22 dyads of a student and mother only; and
8 dyads of a student and father only.
Among parents, mothers were more numerous. Additionally, among mothers, nearly
86% described themselves as married, suggesting that mothers and fathers demographic characteristics would be similar. For these reasons, we selected mothers as
parents to describe demographically. Characteristics of participants and their mothers
are shown in Table 1. This sample diverges from that of the CVD Project in having a
higher proportion of Caucasian participants and reporting considerably higher income.
Although religious affiliation of participants in the CVD Project was not reported, the
current sample likely had a considerably higher proportion of Catholic and Christian
Orthodox participants.

Measures
Measures of maladaptive cognitive patterns
Cognitive Style Questionnaire (CSQ) The CSQ (Alloy et al., 2000) is an expanded
version of the original Attributional Style Questionnaire designed to assess inferential
style. Inferential style is the tendency to attribute negative events to stable and global
causes and infer negative consequences and self-characteristics following negative life
events. The CSQ measures attributions for hypothetical events, expected consequences
of these events, and imagined implications of the events for the self. The CSQ assesses
3

This selection provides the strongest test of the hypothesis that cognitive vulnerability is associated
with depression as measured by the BDI. It also provides comparability with the CVD Project in the
degree of cognitive vulnerability in participants.

123

56

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of participants

Student offspring
Demographic
variable
Age
18 or younger
19
20
21 or older
Gender
Male
Female
Ethnicity
Caucasian
Other
Native Language
English
Other
Religion
Roman Catholic
or Orthodox
Protestant
Other
Number of Siblings
only child only child
1
2
3
4+
Estimate of parent income
< 19,999
20,00029,999
30,00039,999
40,00059,999
60,00079,999
80,000+

Mothers
Percentage
of participants

48.0
22.4
18.4
11.2
31.6
68.4
89.8
10.2
98.0
2.0

72.2
11.3
16.5
6.3
40.6
27.1
16.7
9.4
2.1
2.1
2.1
16.5
22.7
54.6

Demographic
variable
Age
3044
4540
5069
Number of children
1
2
3
4
5+
Ethnicity
Caucasian
Non-Caucasian
Native language
English
Other
Marital status
Single
Married
Separated, Divorced,
or widowed
Employment status
Unemployed
Part-time
Full-time
Income
< 19,999
20,00030,000
30,00040,000
40,00060,000
60,00080,000
80,000+

Percentage
of participants

21.3
37.1
41.6
7.9
41.6
23.6
16.9
10.1
96.6
3.4
88.9
11.1
2.2
85.6
12.2

21.2
77.6
1.3
11.8
9.4
14.1
11.8
12.9
40.0

responses to 24 events equally divided between positive and negative events and
between achievement- and affiliation-related events. Following Alloy et al. (1999), we
scored the CSQ as averages of the 12 negative events across stability, globality,
consequences, and the self. Internal consistency as measured by coefficient a for the
CSQ in this study was .96.
Dysfunctional Attitude ScaleForm A (DAS-Form A) The DAS (Weissman, 1980;
Weissman & Beck, 1978) was designed to measure attitudes underlying the cognitive
content of depressive symptoms following BT (Beck, 1967). The DAS-Form A was
used in its original form (i.e., without the 24 additional items relating to achievement
and affiliation orientation used by Alloy and Abramson (1999) in the CVD Project).
Scoring is based on a 7-point scale in which 1 = totally agree and 7 = totally
disagree. Internal consistency Form A has been measured at .84 to .92 (Weissman &
Beck, 1978). The DAS has been found to have high internal and testretest reliabilities in student populations, ranging from .79 to .88 (Olinger, Kuiper, & Shaw,
1987). Coefficient a for the DAS in the present investigation was .92.

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

57

Measures of developmental origins of maladaptive cognitive patterns

Life Experiences Questionnaire (LEQ) The LEQ (Gibb et al., 2001) is a self-report
instrument designed to measure emotional, physical, and sexual maltreatment. For
emotional and physical maltreatment, both neglect (acts of omission) and abuse (acts of
commission) are assessed. Regarding a broad range of potential perpetrators, from
primary caregivers through other adults through peers, the LEQ asks respondents to
indicate whether maltreatment occurred, how frequently it occurred, and who perpetrated the maltreatment. We used the section of the LEQ addressed to emotional
neglect and abuse which, for the sake of continuity with previous reports, we call
emotional maltreatment. Coefficient a of the LEQ was measured in the present study as
.84.
Parental Attributions for Childrens Events Questionnaire (PACE) The PACE
(Alloy et al., 2001) is a measure designed to assess verbal feedback that parents typically
give their offspring about negative events that may befall the offspring. The PACE
exists in two parallel forms, one for offsprings and one for parents. The PACE presents
12 hypothetical negative events that could occur in the life of the offspring and asks the
respondent to indicate what feedback the parent in question would typically provide if
this negative event were to occur. Types of feedback surveyed are attributions (stability
and globality of attributions) and likely consequences of the event for the offspring.
Types of feedback are presented as examples to which the participant responds on a 10point scale indicating the probability that this feedback would be provided by the
parent. Four of the examples present two combinations of stable, global (depressogenic)
feedback (e.g., in the event of an offspring receiving a failing grade, You arent smart
enough; you never do well in anything and The test was too hard; people are always
making it difficult to succeed) and two combinations of unstable, specific (non-depressogenic) attributions (e.g., You didnt work hard enough on this exam or project
and It will be better when this class is over because this teacher just isnt any good.).
Two examples provide possible consequences of the event for the offspring, one negative/depressogenic consequences (e.g., Now this is going to be on your record and you
wont get into college) and one positive/non-depressogenic (e.g., This will motivate
you to study more so that you will do better in the future.).
The 12 hypothetical events consist of 6 achievement-related scenarios and 6 socially
related events. Multiple scores may be obtained from the PACE, from a single global
score to scores specific to the domain of the event (achievement, interpersonal) and/or
to the type of feedback (attributions, consequences). For the purpose of this study, we
chose to use the total score of the PACE across attributions and consequences because
the investigation focused on broad patterns of relations rather than on specific
hypotheses.
The current form of the PACE in both offspring and parent forms asks participants to
respond to the various options in two different ways: (1) to select the single alternative
representing the feedback that the participant believes the parent in question would be
most likely to give the offspring, and (2) to rate each option on a 10-point scale the
likelihood that the parent in question would provide that particular feedback. As
acknowledged by its originators, the dual instructions for the PACE can be difficult to
follow. Consequently, we provided offspring respondents with a specific example at the
outset of in-person administration of how to complete the questionnaire and we
encouraged parents to call if they had any difficulties. However, both offspring and

123

58

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

parent participants found the first set of instructions easier to comply with than the
second, whereas, consistent with previous usage by the scales originators (Alloy et al.,
2001.), we chose the second method of scoring for use in this study. Internal consistencies for this scoring of the PACE as indicated by coefficient a in this investigation
were very satisfactory at .84 and .87 for the offsprings forms for their mothers and
fathers, respectively, and .77 and .94 for the mother and father forms, respectively.
However, Ns for analyses with the PACEs were reduced.
Parental Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (PDAS) Parent participants filled out a
modified version of the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (DAS; Weissman & Beck, 1978).
Following Turk and Bry (1992), the objects of the statements were changed from the
respondent to the respondents child. Coefficient a for the PDAS for mothers has been
found to be .80 (Griffith, Oliver, & Katz, 2003a, b). Coefficient as for this instrument for
mothers and fathers were measured in the present study as .83 for both mothers and
fathers.
Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) The BDI (Beck & Steer, 1997) is a
third-generation revision of a measure designed to assess the intensity of affective,
cognitive, motivational, and physiological symptoms of depression. The BDI is a 21-item
self-report instrument whose response alternatives are arranged in a four-point Likert
format; scores can range from 0 to 63. Internal consistency of the BDI-II has recently
been measured at .89 in a college student sample (Steer & Clark, 1997). The BDI-II has
good convergent validity in the form of a correlation with the Depression factor scale
score of .76 (Storch, Roberti, & Roth, 2004). Discriminant validity in the form of its
correlation with the BAI was recently measured as .56, comparable to its correlation of
.60 in a large sample of psychiatric outpatients (Steer & Clark, 1997). Internal consistency as measured by coefficient a in the present investigation was .85.
Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) The BAI (Beck, Epstein, Brown, & Steer, 1988) was
developed specifically to measure the severity of anxiety and to discriminate anxiety
from depression reliably in psychiatric populations. The BAI is a self-report inventory
that assesses 21 common symptoms of anxiety using a four-point Likert scale with scores
ranging from 0 to 63. Internal consistency reliability as measured by coefficient a and
one-week testretest reliability have been reported as .92 and .75, respectively (Beck
et al., 1988). Excellent convergent validity and discriminant validity have been reported
in psychiatric populations (Beck et al., 1988). The measure was found to have good
concurrent validity with other measures of anxiety in a community sample (Osman,
Barrios, Aukes, Osman, & Markway, 1993). High internal consistency reliability and
comparable factor structures have been demonstrated in both clinical and student
samples (Borden, Peterson, & Jackson, 1991). Internal consistency of the BAI as
indexed by coefficient a in the present study was .82.
Procedure
The incentive for participation for students was fulfillment of a course requirement for
participation in research or extra course credit. Dyads who completed their participation were entered into a lottery for two prizes: tickets to a university athletic event or a
gift certificate at the university bookstore. Both student offspring and their parents
participated anonymously; data were linked only through code numbers. Instruments
were administered in the constant order of the DAS, the CSQ, the PACE mother form,
the PACE father form, the LEQ, the BDI, the BAI, and a demographic questionnaire.
This order was selected in order to reduce reactivity of all instruments and to avoid

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

59

priming schemas by early administration of measures of maltreatment, depression, and

anxiety.

Results
Table 2 shows scores of each group on the following measures: CSQ; DAS; emotional
maltreatment; offsprings PACE scores for their mother and father; mothers and
fathers PACE scores; mothers and fathers PDAS scores; and offspring scores on the
BDI and the BAI. The High Risk CSQ group scored significantly higher than did the
Low Risk CSQ group on offspring fathers PACE (F[1,35] = 4.80, P < .05), depression
(F[1,67] = 7.62, P < .01), and anxiety (F[1,65] = 4.78, P < .05). The High Risk DAS
group scored significantly higher than the Low Risk DAS group on emotional
maltreatment (F[1,65] = 12.66, P < .01), offspring mothers PACE (F[1,38] = 5.42,
P < .05), offspring fathers PACE (F[1,36] = 14.02, P < .001), depression (F[1,65]
= 14.43, P < .001), and anxiety (F[1,63] = 6.78, P < .01). Table 3 displays zero-order
correlation coefficients among these variables with coefficient Alphas shown on the
diagonal.
In data analyses, we examined the relation between emotional maltreatment and
depression and the degree to which this relation was mediated by MCPs as jointly
operationalized by the CSQ and the DAS. Following Baron and Kenny (1986), we
adapted Gibb et al.s (2001) analyses by using multiple regression which allowed us
simultaneously to examine the unique predictive power of the CSQ and the DAS
considered, and entered, separately, and to determine the extent to which either the
CSQ or the DAS mediated the relation between emotional maltreatment and depression. We used successive predictors to understand whether they predicted additional
unique variance in the BDI and whether they reduced the contribution of previous
predictors, thereby suggesting that the variable just entered served as a mediator of one
previously found to explain a significant portion of variance in the BDI.4
Two hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the associations between the BDI as the dependent variable and the predictors of emotional
maltreatment; MCPs as measured by the CSQ and the DAS; and the BAI. Emotional
maltreatment was forced in on Step 1 to learn whether emotional maltreatment was
significantly associated with depression. A single measure of MCPs, either the CSQ (in
Eq. 1) or the DAS (in Eq. 2), was forced in on Step 2, to learn whether that operationalization of MCPs predicted unique variance in depression and whether, in so doing,
it reduced the contribution made by emotional maltreatment entered in the previous
step. On Step 3, the alternate operationalization of MCPs, the DAS (in Eq. 1) or the
CSQ (in Eq. 2) was forced in to learn whether it predicted unique variance in the BDI
unexplained by the previous measure of MCPs. Finally, the BAI was entered in Step 4
to learn whether the BAI predicted unique variance in the BDI and whether the BAI
reduced the contributions of emotional maltreatment and/or either of the measures of
MCPs.
Results of this hierarchical regression analysis are shown in Table 4. Emotional
maltreatment predicted significant variance in the BDI when entered in Step 1 in both
4

Data in all multiple regression analyses are as independent as data from the same respondents can be.
All multiple regression analyses reported in this study were conducted on scores from the same
respondents, namely offsprings; no data from either mothers or fathers were included in these analyses.

123

123

30

34

41

33

2.50
.47

2.20
.23

3.40
.58

3.87
.30

DAS

2.72
.42

3.32
.88

4.95
.40

4.64
.46

CSQ

3.39
1.65

3.02
1.74

4.09
2.45

4.83
2.39

EMT

16.63
6.38

16.28
5.94

18.83
6.07

20.96
6.47

Child
mother PACE

14.24
6.54

13.44
4.68

18.91
6.24

20.75
6.99

Child father
PACE

17.37
5.82

14.71
4.72

14.78
4.57

16.12
5.62

Mother
PACE

22.19
15.74

15.71
6.45

19.69
6.79

19.61
2.39

Father
PACE

2.39
.47

2.31
.55

2.27
.55

2.29
.42

Mother
parent DAS

2.47
.52

2.50
.59

2.48
.50

2.53
.30

Father
parent DAS

3.38
3.26

3.62
3.10

6.51
5.46

8.15
6.21

BDI

7.81
4.52

8.24
4.24

10.78
5.97

12.09
7.32

BAI

DAS = Dysfunctional Attitude Scale, CSQ = Cognitive Style Questionnaire, EMT = Emotional Maltreatment, PACE = Parental Attribution for Child Events
Form, PDAS = Parental Dysfunctional Attitude Scale, BDI = Beck Depression Inventory, BAI = Beck Anxiety Inventory

High risk DAS

M
SD
High risk CSQ
M
SD
Low risk DAS
M
SD
Low risk CSQ
M
SD

Table 2 Means and standard deviations of high and low risk groups on psychological variables

60
Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

.92

.51*
.96

CSQ

.30*
.18*
.84

EMT

.32*
.18***
.12
.84

Child mother
PACE
.51*
.35**
.25*
.75**
.87

Child father
PACE
.10
.21
.04
.22
.22
.77

Mother
PACE
.14
.06
.13
.28
.39*
.04
.94

Father
PACE
.04
.08
.03
.15
.14
.20
.10
.83

Mother
PDAS

.01
.04
.14
.01
.01
.06
.15
.29*
.83

Father
PDAS

.39**
.27**
.32**
.23*
.25*
.02
.18
.08
.13
.85

BDI

.29**
.19*
.40**
.37**
.31*
.12
.16
.02
.05
.69**
.82

BAI

Coefficient as are shown on the diagonal, DAS = Dysfunctional Attitude Scale, CSQ = Cognitive Style Questionnaire, EMT = Emotional Maltreatment,
PACE = Parental Attribution for Child Events Form, PDAS = Parental Dysfunctional Attitude Scale, BDI = Beck Depression Inventory, BAI = Beck Anxiety
Inventory
*P < .05, **P < .01, ***P = .08

DAS
CSQ
EMT
Child mother PACE
Child father PACE
Mother PACE
Father PACE
Mother PDAS
Father PDAS
BDI
BAI

DAS

Table 3 Zero-order correlations among psychological variables

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

61

123

62

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

Eqs. 1 and 2. However, the amount of variance in the BDI explained by emotional
maltreatment was reduced by the entry of both the DAS (Eq. 1) and the CSQ (Eq. 2) in
Step 2, suggesting that the association between emotional maltreatment and the BDI
was partially, although not completely, mediated by one measure of MCPs. Finally,
variance in the BDI explained by emotional maltreatment was completely eliminated by
forcing the BAI in Step 4 in both Eqs. 1 and 2, suggesting that variance in the BDI not
mediated by a measure of MCPs was completely mediated by anxiety. To summarize
these findings, they suggest that variance in the BDI explained by emotional maltreatment was partially, but not completely, mediated by a measure of MCPs, and that
remaining variance explained by emotional maltreatment was completely mediated by
anxiety.
The difference between Eqs. 1 and 2 lies in the order in which they entered the CSQ
and the DAS. In Eq. 1, in Step 2 the CSQ predicted significant unique variance in the
BDI not predicted by emotional maltreatment, yet in Step 3 the DAS also predicted
additional significant unique variance not predicted by either emotional maltreatment
or the CSQ. In Eq. 2, in Step 2 the DAS predicted significant unique variance in the BDI
not predicted by emotional maltreatment, whereas in Step 3 the CSQ failed to predict
significant unique variance not predicted by either emotional maltreatment or the DAS.
To summarize, the difference between Eqs. 1 and 2 indicates that the DAS always made
a unique, significant contribution in predicting variance in the BDI, even after variance
attributable to the CSQ had been explained.
We then explored relations among the CSQ and the DAS and other measures of
potential developmental origins of MCPs, namely the PACE and the PDAS. As shown
in Table 3, zero-order correlations between the measures of MCPs and potential
parental sources of MCPs indicated that only relations between the measures of MCPs
and the offspring version of the PACE were significant. For this reason, further analyses
were restricted to those pertaining to offspring verions of the mother and father PACE.
In data analyses, we followed the logic of Alloy et al.s (2001) analyses of variance
(ANOVAs), in which risk status as jointly determined by the CSQ and the DAS served
as the major independent variable and scores on measures of parental feedback and
attitudes served as dependent variables. Again, we adapted these data analyses by using
multiple regression, with scores on PACEs serving as criteria and scores on the CSQ and
the DAS as the major predictor variables. Multiple regression allowed us to examine the
relations between both the CSQ and the DAS simultaneously on the one hand and the
selected PACE on the other hand. Additionally, the use of multiple regression allowed
us to examine the possible mediating effects of symptoms of both depression, operationalized by the BDI, and anxiety, operationalized as scores on the BAI. Just as Becks
superordinate theory of psychopathology generally and of anxiety specifically postulate
that any experience interpreted by the individual as threat will activate pre-existing
schemas associated with threat and that current information will be processed by these
threat-related schemas, so BT of depression specifically postulates that any experience
interpreted by the individual as loss will activate schemas associated with loss and that
current information will be processed by such loss-related schemas. Instruments
administered in this study, including but not limited to the PACE, could activate
schemas associated with threat and/or loss and influence participants responses to the
measures.
We conducted two hierarchical multiple regression analyses using one of the offspring versions of the PACE (for either the mother or the father) as the criterion and
the CSQ and DAS as predictors. For each version of the PACE, we tested two

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

63

Table 4 Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting depression (n = 90)
Variable
Equation 1
Step 1
Emotional maltreatment
Step 2
Emotional maltreatment
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Step 3
Emotional maltreatment
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Step 4
Emotional maltreatment
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Beck Anxiety Inventory
Equation 2
Step 1
Emotional maltreatment
Step 2
Emotional maltreatment
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Step 3
Emotional maltreatment
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Step 4
Emotional maltreatment
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Beck Anxiety Inventory

SE B

.03

.01

.30**

.02
1.18

.01
.52

.26*
.23*

.02
.44
2.09

.01
.58
.81

.20+
.09
.30*

.00
.37
1.34
.54

.01
.45
.64
.07

.00
.07
.19*
.62****

.03

.01

.30**

.02
2.40

.01
.70

.20***
.34***

.02
2.09
.44

.01
.81
.58

.20+
.30*
.09

.00
1.34
.37
.54

.01
.64
.45
.07

.00
.19*
.07
.62****

For Eq. 1, R2 = .09 for Step 1; DR2 = .11 for Step 2; DR2 = .01 for Step 3. DR2 = .31 for Step 4
For Eq. 2, R2 = .09 for Step 1; DR2 = .05 for Step 2; DR2 = .06 for Step 3. DR2 = .31 for Step 4
+
P = .054, *P < .05, **P < .01, ***P < .001, ****P < .0001

equations: in Eq. 1, the CSQ was entered first, followed by the DAS; in Eq. 2, the DAS
was entered first, followed by the CSQ. This procedure allowed us to learn whether
either the DAS or the CSQ predicted unique variance in that version of the PACE.
Where either the CSQ or the DAS proved to be a significant predictor, we followed up
with additional steps in which we entered measures of affective symptoms (first the BDI,
then the BAI) to learn whether either depression or anxiety served as a mediator of
these relation.
Results of these analyses are shown in Tables 5 and 6. As shown in Table 5,
relations between the two measures of MCPs and offspring mothers PACEs were
relatively tenuous. Although the DAS appeared to be a significant predictor of
offspring mothers PACEs when entered first, the significance of this relation attenuated quickly when variance shared with symptoms of depression and symptoms of
anxiety was taken into account. By the last step, when symptoms of anxiety were
entered into the equation, only anxious symptoms remained a significant predictor of
offspring mothers PACEs. As shown in Table 6, relations between measures of
MCPs, and in particular the DAS, and offspring fathers PACEs, however, were quite

123

64

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

Table 5 Summary of hierarchical multiple regression predicting scores on offsprings scores on mother
form of the parental attributions for child events
Variable
Equation 1
Step 1
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Step 2
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Step 3
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Beck Depression Inventory
Step 4
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Beck Depression Inventory
Beck Anxiety Inventory
Equation 2
Step 1
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Step 2
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Step 3
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Beck Depression Inventory
Step 4
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Beck Depression Inventory
Beck Anxiety Inventory

SE B

3.55

2.69

.17

.16
9.52

3.28
4.50

.01
.31+

.38
8.02
.63

3.28
5.20
.61

.02
.26
.14

.39
7.83
.85
1.69

3.17
5.02
.89
.77

.02
.25
.20
.44*

9.37

3.98

.30*

9.52
.16

4.50
3.28

.31+
.01

8.02
.38
.63

5.20
3.28
.61

.26
.02
.14

7.83
.39
.85
1.69

5.02
3.17
.89
.77

.25
.02
.19
.44*

For Eq. 1, R2 = .09 for Step 1; DR2 = .00 for Step 2; DR2 = .02 for Step 3. DR2 = .08 for Step 4
For Eq. 2, R2 = .03 for Step 1; DR2 = .06 for Step 2; DR2 = .02 for Step 3. DR2 = .08 for Step 4
+
P = .062, *P < .05

robust. The DAS remained a significant predictor of offspring fathers PACEs after
variance shared with symptoms of both depression and anxiety had been taken into
account. By the last step, when symptoms of anxiety were entered into the equation,
symptoms of depression were no longer significantly associated with offspring fathers
PACEs; rather, only offspring DAS and symptoms of anxiety remained significant
predictors. The CSQ significantly predicted offspring fathers PACE when entered
alone on the first step, but did not remain a significant predictor when the DAS was
entered on the second step.

Discussion
The first objective of this study was to examine the pattern of relations between the two
different indicators of MCPs (i.e., CSQ, DAS), depression considered as a continuum of

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

65

Table 6 Summary of hierarchical multiple regression predicting scores on offsprings scores on father
form of the parental attributions for child events
Variable
Equation 1
Step 1
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Step 2
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Step 3
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Beck Depression Inventory
Step 4
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Beck Depression Inventory
Beck Anxiety Inventory
Equation 2
Step 1
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Step 2
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Step 3
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Beck Depression Inventory
Step 4
Dysfunctional Attitude Scale
Cognitive Style Questionnaire
Beck Depression Inventory
Beck Anxiety Inventory

SE B

8.13

3.06

.36*

2.35
14.51

3.50
5.06

.10
.44**

1.87
13.91
.55

3.59
5.20
.78

.08
.42**
.10

1.77
14.52
.87
1.84

3.47
5.03
1.02
.89

.08
.44**
-.15
.35*

16.49

4.13

.50***

14.51
2.35

5.10
3.50

.44**
.10

13.91
1.87
.55

5.20
3.59
.78

.42**
.08
.10

14.52
1.77
.87
1.84

5.02
3.47
1.02
.89

.44**
.08
.15
.35*

For Eq. 1, R2 = .25 for Step 1; DR2 = .01 for Step 2; DR2 = .01 for Step 3. DR2 = .06 for Step 4
For Eq. 2, R2 = .13 for Step 1; DR2 = .13 for Step 2; DR2 = .01 for Step 3. DR2 = .06 for Step 4
*P < .05, **P < .01, ***P < .001

symptoms, and potential developmental origins of MCPs. As noted in Table 3, the

correlation of .37 between the CSQ and the DAS in the final sample was .51. The
correlation was .37 in the initial subject pool from which the four smaller samples of
participants were drawn based on their scores on the CSQ and the DAS. The modest
magnitude of these correlations argues immediately that the CSQ and the DAS measure
related but discriminable constructs and suggests that it may be worthwhile to consider
and examine them independently.
As shown in Table 3, the correlation between the CSQ and the BDI was .27; the
correlation between the DAS and the BDI was .39. The two correlations are only
marginally significantly different (Hotellings t = 1.59, P < .10). These correlations are
quite comparable to the corresponding correlations of .37 and .39 obtained by Haeffel
et al. (2003). Corresponding correlations obtained by Hankin et al. (2004) in Study 3
were .56 and .40 (Study 3 was the only study with comparable data because Studies 1
and 2 used non-standard time intervals). We have no explanation for the significantly
higher average correlation between the CSQ and the BDI obtained by Hankin et al.

123

66

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

Overall, it appears the CSQ and the DAS were associated about as strongly with
depression in this study as in others for which there is comparable data.
Regarding the pattern of relations among MCPs and potential developmental origins,
our findings replicate those found earlier by Gibb et al. (2001). Briefly, emotional
maltreatment was associated with depression, and this association was mediated by
MCPs. The pattern of relations among MCPs, offsprings perceptions of their fathers
feedback, and depression partially replicates that found earlier by Alloy et al. (2001).
Briefly, offsprings perceptions of their fathers negative feedback were associated with
the DAS, and this association was not mediated by current depression.
To summarize the current findings, the pattern of relations among the DAS,
depression, and potential developmental origins was more robust than the pattern of
relations among the CSQ, depression, and potential developmental origins. The
apparent stronger contribution of the DAS in this study diverges from the stronger
contribution of the CSQ to the retrospective identification of diagnoses of depression
found by Haeffel et al. (2003). The divergence between the present findings and those of
Haeffel et al. suggests that it is premature to conclude that a single construct or operationalization of MCPs makes a stronger contribution to MCPs. For example, this
investigation examined the relation between the CSQ and the DAS and depression
considered as a continuum of symptoms, whereas Haeffel et al.s research examined the
relation between the CSQ and the DAS and lifetime diagnoses of depression. Additionally, Haeffel et al.s study was longitudinal, whereas this study was cross-sectional.
Finally, it is possible that different constructs or operationalizations of MCPs may reveal
contributions to potential developmental origins that differ in strength.
The robustness of the associations among the DAS, depression, and indices of
potential developmental origin may be attributed in part to its conceptual basis: the
DAS was designed to assess vulnerability to depression broadly construed as a nonendogenous, polydimensional condition. The CSQ, by contrast, was designed to measure vulnerability to hopelessness depression, a postulated subtype of non-endogenous
depression which shares many, but not all, symptoms with the broader construct of
non-endogenous depression. This study made no attempt to measure the symptoms
of hopelessness depression or to examine relations between either of the indices of
MCPs and hopelessness depression. It seems not only possible but likely that the CSQ
may demonstrate more robust relations with hopelessness and hopelessness depression
than does the DAS.
The second objective of this study was to examine relations among MCPs, depression, and potential developmental origins in the context of anxiety also considered as a
continuum of symptoms. We begin by noting levels of symptoms of depression and
anxiety across the four subsamples of High and Low Risk on the CSQ and the DAS,
respectively. Despite the fact that two of the four subsamples were selected to be at high
risk for depression by virtue of their scores on the two indicators of MCPs, scores on
symptoms of anxiety in those two groups actually exceeded their scores on symptoms of
depression. Indeed, across all four subsamples, participants not only acknowledged
more symptoms of anxiety than of depression but scored relatively high (M = 9.98) on
symptoms of anxiety but relatively low (M = 5.57) on symptoms of depression. It seems
appropriate to characterize the sample as a whole as relatively anxious but slightly
depressed. Despite the differences in levels of symptoms of anxiety and depression, the
two types of symptom were moderately to highly correlated in the sample as a whole
(r = .69).

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

67

Regarding relations among depression, emotional maltreatment, and DAS, anxiety

partially but not totally mediated the relation between the DAS and depression. As
shown in Table 3, both anxiety and depression were significantly related to offsprings
perceptions of negative feedback from their mothers and their fathers. However, anxiety appeared to play no role in relations among MCPs and offsprings perceptions of
negative feedback from their parents. Depression completely mediated the relation
between the DAS and offsprings perceptions of negative feedback from their mothers
so that there was no remaining relation that anxiety could potentially mediate. By
contrast, neither depression nor anxiety had any role in the relation between the DAS
and offsprings perception of negative feedback from their fathers.
Overall, the pattern of relations among MCPs, depression, and variables representing
potential developmental origins of MCPs mirrored quite faithfully the relations found in
the CVD Project. It must be emphasized that the relations among MCPs and depression
found in the present study are purely correlational, not longitudinal as in the CVD
Project. However, the overall similarity in the patterns of relations found in the CVD
Project and in the present study suggests findings of the CVD Project may be quite
robust.
Strengths of the current study include the following. First, this research separated the
CSQ and the DAS in examining their relations to MCPs while returning to the original
and most frequently used form of the DAS. Second, this investigation took a wide
angle approach in examining a network of relations among MCPs and potential
developmental origins of MCPs in the form of childhood emotional maltreatment and
parental negative feedback. Third, the study included anxiety in this network of relations and examined the role that anxiety played on relations within the network. Fourth,
the study was conducted in a sample that is distinctive from those used in any previous
investigation in this stream of research and thus extended the generalizability of previous findings. Fifth, the study was comparable to the CVD in criteria for selection of
participants in terms of standing on indicators of MCPs and in instruments used to
measure potential developmental origins such as the LEQ and the PACE.
Limitations of the present investigation are part and parcel of its cross-sectional,
correlational design. Critical among these limitations is that associations between the
two indices of MCPs and all other variables included in the study are predictive only in
the statistical but not in the longitudinal sense; findings suggest that MCPs may be a
concomitant of symptoms of depression (as well as of self-reported emotional maltreatment and offsprings perceptions of parents typical feedback styles), but not
necessarily a cause of any of these variables. Second, the use of a single method of
response (written self-report) may have inflated apparent associations among measures.
Third, the sample size was relatively small, although large enough to demonstrate some
robust and quite significant effects. Sample size certainly limited power, although power
ranged from a low of .35 to a high of 1.00 with an average power of .50 across all steps of
all equations. Sample size, combined with the fact that the majority of our sample was
female, did not permit reliable within-gender analyses. Within-gender analyses would
have been desirable and of interest, particularly in the realm of relations between the
DAS and the PACE; some effects that appear to be specific to a particular parent (the
father) may rather be specific to the cross-gender relationship between daughters and
fathers. Finally, difficulty with instructions for the PACE led to greatly reduced Ns for
analyses involving parents PACEs. It was impossible to calculate coefficient a for
fathers PACEs, leading to their exclusion from analyses; although mothers PACEs had
very satisfactory a, power for their analyses was greatly reduced.

123

68

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

The present investigation may be set in the context of the stream of literature
beginning with the CVD Project, augmented by partial replications and extensions by
Haeffel et al. (2003) and Hankin et al. (2004), and elaborated by Gibb and colleagues
(Gibb et al., 2001; Gibb, 2002). Findings of this study suggest that it may be timely and
fruitful to undertake further research examining and separating the contributions of the
two indicators of MCPs, particularly in their relations to depression, potential developmental origins, and anxiety. Current findings also suggest that it will be important to
increase the number of male participants so as to permit separating the effects of crossgender offspring-parent relationships from the effects of daughterfather relationships.
If findings of such proposed research are significant, they will suggest that it may be
feasible to detect young adults at risk for depression on the basis of a self-report
measure of cognitive style and/or dysfunctional attitudes and to offer intervention
designed to reduce the level of risk before the onset of depression.
Acknowledgments We would like to thank Colin Duggan, Gina Insulato, Joe Michael, and Rich
Martielli for their invaluable help with conducting this study, and Jillon Vander Wal for her careful, close
reading of the manuscript. We would also like to thank anonymous reviewers for their contributions to
the final form of this article through their thoughtful, informed comments.

References
Abramson, L. Y., Metalsky, G. I., & Alloy, L. B. (1989). Hopelessness depression: A theory-based
subtype of depression. Psychological Review, 96, 358372.
Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (1999). The TempleWisconsin Cognitive vulnerability to depression
project: Conceptual background, design, and methods. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An
International Quarterly, 13, 277262.
Alloy, L. B., Abramson, L. Y., Hogan, M. E., Whitehouse, W. G., Rose, D. T., Robinson, M. S., Kim, R.
S., & Lapkin, J. B. (2000). The TempleWisconsin cognitive vulnerability to depression project:
Lifetime history of Axis I psychopathology in individuals at high and low cognitive risk for
depression (2000). Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109, 403418.
Alloy, L. B., Abramson, L. Y., Tashman, N. A., Berrebbi, D. S., Hogan, M. E., Whitehouse, W. G.,
Crossfield, A. G., & Morocco, A. (2001). Developmental origins of cognitive vulnerability to
depression: Parenting, cognitive, and inferential feedback styles of the parents of individuals at high
and low cognitive risk for depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, 397423.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderate-mediator variable distinction in social research:
Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
51, 11731182.
Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: Causes and treatment. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Beck, A. T. (1987). Cognitive models of depression. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 1, 537.
Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1988). An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety:
Psychometric properties. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 893897.
Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1997). Beck depression inventory manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Borden, J. W., Peterson, D. R., & Jackson, E. A. (1991). The Beck anxiety inventory in nonclinical
samples: Initial psychometric properties. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 13,
345356.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991). Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: Psychometric evidence
and taxonomic implications. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 316336.
Crossfield, A. G., Alloy, L. B., Gibb, B. E., & Abramson, L. Y. (2002). The development of depressogenic cognitive styles: The role of negative childhood life events and parental inferential feedback.
Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 16, 487502.
Gibb, B. E. (2002). Childhood maltreatment and negative cogntive styles: A quantitative and qualitative
review. Clinical Psychology Review, 22, 223246.

123

Cogn Ther Res (2007) 31:5169

69

Gibb, B. E., Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (2003). Global reports of childhood maltreatment versus
recall of specific maltreatment experiences: Relationships with dysfunctional attitudes and depressive symptoms. Cognition and Emotion, 17, 903915.
Gibb, B. E., Alloy, L. B., Abramson, L. Y., & Marx, B. P. (2003). Childhood maltreatment and maltreatment-specific inferences: A test of Rose and Abramsons (1992) extension of the hopelessness
theory. Cognition and Emotion, 17, 917931.
Gibb, B. E., Alloy, L. B., Abramson, L. Y, Rose, D. T., Whitehouse, W. G., Donovan, P., Hogan, M. E.,
Cronholm, J., & Tierney, S. (2001). History of childhood maltreatment, negative cognitive styles, and
episodes of depression in adulthood. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, 425226.
Griffith, S. J., Oliver, J. M., & Katz, B. M. (2003a). Mothers attributional style for events in their
offsprings lives as predictors of their offsprings cognitive vulnerability to depression. North
American Journal of Psychology, 5, 114.
Griffith, S. J., Oliver, J. M., & Katz, B. M. (2003b). Mothers attributional style for events in their
offsprings lives as predictors of their offsprings cognitive vulnerability to depression. North
American Journal of Psychology, 5, 114.Unpublished raw data.
Haeffel, G. J., Abramson, L. Y., Voelz, Z. R., Metalsky, G. I., Halberstadt, L., Benjamin, M., Donovan,
P., Hogan, M., Hankin, B. L., & Alloy, L. B. (2003). Cognitive vulnerability to depression and
lifetime history of Axis I psychopathology: A comparison of negative cognitive styles (CSQ) and
dysfunctional attitudes (DAS). Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 17, 322.
Hankin, B. L., Abramson, L. Y., Miller, N., & Haeffel, G. J. (2004). Cognitive vulnerability-stress
theories of depression: Examining affective specificity in the prediction of depression versus anxiety
in three prospective studies. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 28, 309345.
Ingram, R. E., Miranda, J., & Segal, Z. V. (1998). Cognitive vulnerability to depression. New York:
Guilford Press.
Olinger, L. J., Kuiper, N. A., & Shaw, B. F. (1987). Dysfunctional attitudes and stressful life events: An
interactive model of depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 11, 2540.
Osman, A., Barrios, F. X., Osman, J. R., & Markway, K. (1993). Further psychometric evaluation of the
Fear Questionnaire: Responses of college students. Psychological Reports, 73, 12591266.
Rose, D. T., & Abramson, L. Y. (1992). Developmental predictors of depressive cognitive style:
Research and theory. In D. Cicchetti, & S. L. Toth (Eds)., Developmental perspectives on depression.
Rochester symposium on developmental psychopathology (Vol. 4, pp. 323349).
Steer, R. A., & Clark, D. S. (1997). Psychometric characteristics of the Beck Depression Inventory-II
with college students. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 30, 128136.
Storch, E. A., Roberti, J. W., & Roth, D. A. (2004). Factor structure, concurrent validity, and internal
consistency of the Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition in a sample of college students.
Depression and Anxiety, 19, 187189.
Turk, E., & Bry, D. (1992). Adolescents and parents explanatory styles and parents causal explanations
about their adolescents. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 16, 349357.
Weissman, A. N. (1980). Assessing depressionogenic attitudes: A validation study. Paper presented at the
51st Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Hartford, CT.
Weissman, A. N., & Beck, A. T. (1978). Development and validation of the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto,
Canada.

123