Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The social impact of the response elicited by depressed behaviour Manly, Patricia Colleen 1988

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1988_A1 M36.pdf [ 6MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0098146.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0098146-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0098146-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0098146-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0098146-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0098146-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0098146-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0098146-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0098146.ris

Full Text

THE  SOCIAL IMPACT OF THE RESPONSE  ELICITED BY DEPRESSED BEHAVIOUR By PATRICIA COLLEEN MANLY B.A. (With D i s t i n c t i o n ) , The U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l g a r y , 1978 M.A., The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1981  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE  FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES  ( C l i n i c a l Psychology Program, Department o f Psychology)  We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the required  standard.  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA February, 1988 (c) P a t r i c i a C o l l e e n Manly, 1988  In  presenting  degree freely  at  this  the  available  copying  of  department publication  of  in  University  of  for  this or  thesis  this  fulfilment  British  Columbia,  reference and  thesis by  partial  for  his thesis  scholarly  or for  her  of  The University of British 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3  DE-6f3/81)  Columbia  I  I further  purposes  gain  the  shall  requirements  agree  that  agree  may  representatives.  financial  permission.  Department  study.  of  be  It not  is  that  the  Library  permission  granted  by  understood be  for  allowed  an  advanced  shall for  the that  without  make  it  extensive  head  of  my  copying  or  my  written  ii  Abstract A f u n d a m e n t a l a s s u m p t i o n u n d e r l y i n g any i n t e r p e r s o n a l model o f d e p r e s s i o n i s t h a t d e p r e s s e d s o c i a l b e h a v i o u r evokes a p r e d i c t a b l e response from others that i n turn contributes t o depression. Whereas most r e c e n t r e s e a r c h h a s f o c u s e d on t h e r e s p o n s e t h a t t h e d e p r e s s e d e l i c i t i n o t h e r s , t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y examined the s o c i a l impact o f t h a t response. The c e n t r a l p r e m i s e o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l m o d e l s o f d e p r e s s i o n c a n be e x p r e s s e d more p r e c i s e l y i n t e r m s o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l c i r c u m p l e x complementarity theory: The h o s t i l e - s u b m i s s i v e q u a l i t y t h a t has been r e p o r t e d i n depressed b e h a v i o u r evokes a c o m p l e m e n t a r y r e s p o n s e f r o m o t h e r s ( l a b e l l e d RD). That r e s p o n s e , i n t u r n , e v o k e s more h o s t i l i t y a n d submissiveness i n the depressed, thus perpetuating the cycle. To h a v e c l i n i c a l r e l e v a n c e , RD w o u l d a l s o be e x p e c t e d t o i n d u c e r e l a t i v e l y n e g a t i v e mood. Predictions r e g a r d i n g p o s s i b l e i n t r a p e r s o n a l m e d i a t i n g v a r i a b l e s were d e r i v e d f r o m c r i t i c s and p r o p o n e n t s o f c o g n i t i v e m o d e l s of depression. A f t e r i n i t i a l mood was a s s e s s e d , e a c h o f 12 0 f e m a l e s u b j e c t s was shown a v i d e o t a p e d e p i c t i n g e i t h e r RD o r a control condition. Each s u b j e c t then completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s a s s e s s i n g mood, h e r p e r c e p t i o n s o f what she w o u l d be l i k e i n t h e company o f t h e p e r s o n s h e h a d watched, and t h e s o c i a l impact o f t h e p e r s o n she had watched. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t , compared t o t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p , a) s u b j e c t s e x p o s e d t o RD w o u l d show more n e g a t i v e mood, b) t h e y w o u l d a n t i c i p a t e t h a t t h e y w o u l d be more h o s t i l e a n d s u b m i s s i v e i n t h e company o f t h e p e r s o n t h e y saw, a n d c) RD w o u l d i m p a c t a s t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l complement o f h o s t i l i t y - s u b m i s s i o n , w h e t h e r a c c o r d i n g t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l model o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l c o m p l e m e n t a r i t y o r a f a c e t a n a l y t i c approach. T h e s e t h r e e p r e d i c t i o n s were b o r n e o u t a n d t h e f a c e t a n a l y t i c p r e d i c t i o n was supported. Further predictions that preexisting d e p r e s s i v e symptoms a n d c o g n i t i o n s w o u l d c o r r e l a t e w i t h mood a n d s o c i a l a c c e p t a n c e f o r e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p s u b j e c t s were n o t s u p p o r t e d . M e t h o d o l o g i c a l and t h e o r e t i c a l implications are discussed.  iii  Table o f Contents Page  Abstract  i i  L i s t of Tables  v  L i s t of Figures  vi  Acknowledgments  v i i  Introduction  1  T r a d i t i o n a l P s y c h o s o c i a l Models  2  S o c i a l I n t e r a c t i o n a l Models  8  P r e d i c t i n g S o c i a l Impact  23  I n t e r p e r s o n a l Circumplex T h e o r i e s  25  C o g n i t i v e Models o f Depression  35  Summary  38  Method  41  Subjects  ".  41  Measures  41  Videotape Stimulus M a t e r i a l  46  V e r i f i c a t i o n o f Videotape Content  48  Procedure  53  Results  54  Subject C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  54  Between Groups Comparisons  54  Mood  54  I n t e r p e r s o n a l Complementarity  58  S o c i a l Acceptance  61  W i t h i n Groups Comparisons  61  continued  iv  Discussion  64  Negative Mood I n d u c t i o n  64  I n t e r p e r s o n a l Complementarity  67  Mediating Variables  80  I n t e r p e r s o n a l Models o f Depression  81  References  86  Appendix  98  V  List  of Tables Page  Table  1  Dimensions o f t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l circumplex  Table  2  27  Facet composition  of interpersonal  variables  Table  Table  3  4  33  Reliability  estimates  f o r videotape  behavioural  coding data  51  Mean r a t i n g s o f v i d e o t a p e d  targets  7  b e h a v i o u r by c o n d i t i o n  Table  5  Mood m e a s u r e s :  Cell  52  means a n d  standard deviations  Table  6  G r o u p means a n d s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s f o r interpersonal  Table  7  55  circumplex  measures  . . .  .59  Within groups c o r r e l a t i o n s o f posttest  mood a n d s o c i a l  with pretest and  acceptance  d e p r e s s i v e symptoms (BDI)  cognitions  (DAS)  62  vi  L i s t of Figures Page Figure 1  Complementarity p r e d i c t e d  according  t o K i e s l e r ' s (1983) model  Figure 2  Complementarity p r e d i c t e d  31  according  t o Wiggins' (1982) f a c e t a n a l y t i c approach  Figure 3  34  Time by c o n d i t i o n i n t e r a c t i o n s f o r 5 mood v a r i a b l e s  57  vii  Acknowledgements F i r s t and foremost, I would l i k e t o acknowledge t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f my s u p e r v i s o r y c o m m i t t e e , K e i t h S. Dobson ( c h a i r ) , J e r r y S. W i g g i n s , a n d D e m e t r i o s Papageorgis. T h e i r c o l l e c t i v e s u p p o r t and p e r s p i c a c i t y were i n v a l u a b l e t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o u r s e o f t h i s p r o j e c t . T o g e t h e r t h e y comprised t h e k i n d o f a d v i s o r y committee t h a t e v e r y g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t hopes f o r by p r o v i d i n g a c o n g e n i a l b a l a n c e o f g u i d a n c e a n d autonomy. S e v e r a l p e o p l e a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n s made t a n g i b l e c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o s p e c i f i c stages o f t h i s p r o j e c t . F i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t was p r o v i d e d b y a S o c i a l S c i e n c e s a n d H u m a n i t i e s R e s e a r c h C o u n c i l o f Canada d o c t o r a l fellowship. P i l o t work f o r a n e a r l i e r v e r s i o n o f t h i s s t u d y was made p o s s i b l e w i t h t h e h e l p o f p s y c h i a t r i s t Ron Remick and t h e Shaughnessy H o s p i t a l A f f e c t i v e D i s o r d e r s U n i t , r e s e a r c h c o - o r d i n a t o r H a r r y L e i b e r and t h e s t a f f o f s e v e r a l G r e a t e r V a n c o u v e r Community C a r e Teams, p a r t i c u l a r l y D a v i d Brown, a n d numerous anonymous volunteers. The s t u d y ' s v i d e o t a p e d s t i m u l i were p r o d u c e d w i t h t h e h e l p o f a c t o r s L y n n S c h n e i d e r a n d L o r i Dungey, and b e h a v i o u r a l c o d e r s V i v i e n E s c o t t a n d E l a i n e Conway. I am g r a t e f u l t o W o l f g a n g L i n d e n f o r t h e g e n e r o u s l o a n o f VCR e q u i p m e n t t h a t f a c i l i t a t e d s p e e d y d a t a c o l l e c t i o n . The s u p p o r t o f t h e d i r e c t o r a n d s t a f f o f t h e New W e s t m i n s t e r M e n t a l H e a l t h C e n t r e were i n v a l u a b l e i n t h e l a t e r stages of t h i s project. T h a n k s a r e a l s o due f o r t h e h e l p f u l comments a n d s u p p o r t p r o v i d e d b y K e i t h Dobson's g r a d u a t e r e s e a r c h team, i n a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r : L o r i B l o c k , E l s i e Cheung, J u d i t h C u t s h a l l , Renee-Louise Franche, and R i s h a J o f f e . I n no s m a l l way, t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h i s p r o j e c t h a s b e e n made p o s s i b l e , a n d c e r t a i n l y more b e a r a b l e , b y t h e s t e a d f a s t s u p p o r t o f f a m i l y and f r i e n d s . For their t o l e r a n c e a n d g o o d humour t h r o u g h o u t t h i s p r e o c c u p a t i o n , I w i l l e v e r be g r a t e f u l .  1  Epidemiological in  every  five  an  episode  evidence  people  to  have  clinically  their  have been past may  or  loved  the  focus  and  to  an  other  with  alternative  research  one  suffer  in their  lives  who  acquaintance,  nature  of  such  friend,  depression  interest  interactional  and  in  in  the  perspective  supplementary  perspectives  is  interactions  maintenance of  social  as  will  someone  increasing research A  many  r a t e , almost everyone i s  an  The  as  population  interact  e t i o l o g y and of  that  some p o i n t  whether  a half.  both  at  At t h i s  one.  i n the  provide to  occasion  role  decade  view  general  1985).  depressed,  colleague, and  i n the  of major d e p r e s s i o n  (Wing & B e b b i n g t o n , likely  suggests  the  point study  of of  depression. This  chapter  traditional critically (e.g.,  1976b)  the  examine  work  Robinson,  social  1976b).  will  1982;  impact  generate  be  elicit  research  regarding  that  of  research  i n others  precise,  interactional  models  the  &  i n maintaining  Coyne's Coyne's  the  work  has that  Coyne, 1976a; G o t l i b & 1985),  e m p i r i c a l study  concomitant  of  the the  implications  depression.  t e s t a b l e hypotheses  and  (1976a,  response  Loewenstein,  first and  controversies  from  examining (e.g.,  of then  Although  Hokanson,  t h a t response  i t s role  emerged  examples  depression,  particular,  have  represents  of  social  reviewed.  Howes,  review  models  recent In  considerable  depressed  present  more  questions  generated  briefly  psychosocial  Coyne  research  will  regarding  In  order  the  to  social  2  impact was  of  the  response  necessary  predictions  to  &  1982)  1983;  &  (e.g.,  Lewinsohn,  Kiesler,  of  depression  Coyne, 1980)  by  Thus,  1969;  theory  it  model  theories.  (Carson,  cognitive  behaviour,  (1976b)  other  its critics  Youngren  depressed  Coyne's  theory  and  1967,1974) and  Gotlib,  by  from  circumplex  Wiggins,  (Beck,  augment  derived  interpersonal 1983;  elicited  1982;  will  Coyne  also  be  reviewed.  Traditional  Psychosocial  Traditional  psychosocial  tended to r e f l e c t end  point  of  Antecedents  a  the  have  not  and  but  findings  models o f  to  to provide that  social  studies of l i f e  1983;  described  be  the  of  characteristics  discussed  examples o f t h e  as  terms  functioning,  comprehensive  have  antecedents. in  environment,  research  support,  and  s t r e s s e v e n t s and  1978;  Monroe,  research  been  characterize  environmental  s t r e s s events,  Harris,  depression  psychosocial  which w i l l a  depression  of  social  provide  of  or  their  i n turn.  This  review types  traditional  of  of  this  theories  psychosocial  depression.  Social  &  chain  individual's social  each of  meant  literature,  the  models  that regards  typically  of  depressed  interaction, is  a viewpoint causal  characteristics of  Models  Costello,  Imhoff,  design  and  Wise,  findings,  studies  of  Expressed Emotion. social  1982; &  includes  support  Fiore,  Harris, they  1983) will  Since  (eg.,  Becker  life  Brown  &  Coppel,  have  similar  be  discussed  3  together.  Such  self-report moderately levels 1983  data  of social  tend  with  evidence  t o experience  Expressed &  another  example  focuses its  following  the patient.  interview  more t h a n  one-hour predict  patient's  symptom  Vaughn  & Leff,  groups  relapsed  &  1976) . during  of  family  health  relapse  social  regarding  relies  Hooley,  represent  research  depressive  that  symptoms  (EE) r e f e r s  members  make  overinvolvement by means  to the critical  i n regard  of observational i n a structured  professional.  The  occurrence  r e m a r k s b y a f a m i l y member i n a  EE)  has  been  i n patients None  1986;  1976)  o f a f a m i l y member  (high  depressed  research  Leff,  Emotion  emotional  2 or 3 c r i t i c a l  interview  Moos,  e n v i r o n m e n t o f t h e f a m i l y and  I t i s assessed  by a m e n t a l  low  i n t h e e t i o l o g y and  environmental  Expressed  o f t h e comments  &  negative  (eg., Hooley,  social  o r demonstrate  ratings  of  a  that  i s inconclusive  re-emergence  treatment.  and  Cronkite,  suggests  Vaughn  social  the  t o which  remarks to  in  events  t o be  design.  1986;  of  life  a relatively  studies  on t h e s p e c i f i c  role  degree  Emotion  retrospective  depression  since the related  research  Teasdale,  found  an environment  maintenance o f depression, upon c o r r e l a t i o n a l  upon  (cf.Billings,  This  o f such  rely  stressful  but the l i t e r a t u r e  importance  Orley,  to  generally  support  f o r review).  environment,  tend  and have  correlated  individuals  the  studies  found  (Hooley  of the patients  9-month  follow-ups.  to  reliably  e t a l . , 1986; i n t h e l o w EE Unfortunately,  *  low  EE  seems  to  be  relatively  rare  in  the  families  of  4  depressed p a t i e n t s . Hooley  and h e r c o l l e a g u e s  1986)  indicates  exhibited to  have  that  low EE.  almost  critical  social  only  20  cannot  be  points  determined  a hostile  -  1986; H o o l e y 24%  of  et a l . ,  their  subjects  I n o t h e r words, a d e p r e s s e d p a t i e n t  environment  correctly  patients  (Hooley,  a n 80% c h a n c e  Hooley  that  An e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e d a t a p r e s e n t e d by  family  and bears  o f e x p e r i e n c i n g a h o s t i l e and within  out that  from  the family.  the direction  these  studies,  environment  some  seems  relationship  of causality  we  i s common  Although  may  conclude  f o r depressed  to the recurrence of  depression. The second  social  functioning  traditional  antecedents of s o c i a l  r o l e performance 1987;  problem  solving 1983),  meaning  and  Weissman, 1973;  and  &  external  studied  adjustment  of as  (Weissman  comparison  with  &  nondepressed  &  They  ability  1974). women,  sources  of  1980).  & Weissman,  Klerman, and  described t o perform  They  &  1971; Weissman &  performance  women.  Paykel,  (Paykel  Seigel,  role  individual's  1979; Zemore  Bemporad,  & Tonks,  Paykel,  social  &  colleagues  Prusoff,  depressed an  studies  interpersonal  self-limiting  (Arieti  and t h e i r  the  1974),  & Arsanow,  and  gratification  Paykel,  to psychosocial  research includes  Paykel,  (Gotlib  1974; Weissman,  adjustment  roles  skills  Such  represents the  ( e . g . , B o t h w e l l & Weissman, 1977;  Weissman  P a y k e l , Weissman,  Paykel, have  area o f research r e l a t e d  of depression.  Dobson,  Dell,  o f the depressed  found  depressed  1971) social social social  that, women  in were  5  more  likely  to  interpersonal dependency,  report  friction,  social  accompanied by a g r e a t e r rumination  research  (Bothwell  that  formerly  social  work  contacts  outside  et  al.,  t h e home f a m i l y , and  1971).  Subsequent  & Weissman, 1977; Dobson, 1987) h a s f o u n d women  show  less  severe  deficits in  f u n c t i o n i n g t h a n do d e p r e s s e d women.  specific  aspect  found  less  relevant  that  interpersonal Similarly, described skills  problem  depressed  problems  subjects  deficits  Gotlib  than  generated to  found  a n d Bemporad  depression  of  their  from  a  (1980)  have  subjects  showed  who  comparable level  psychodynamic  proposed  Based  studies,  concluded  depression  they  self-limited  sources  that  depression.  o f meaning  people  t o maintain Arieti  that  who  self  of  upon  that  i s a  heavily  upon  identified  and e x t e r n a l  source  case  function  are especially  a n d Bemporad  has  clinical  of  They  external vulnerable  a subtype o f  wherein a s i n g l e dominant r e l a t i o n s h i p  restricted  model o f  and g r a t i f i c a t i o n .  rely  esteem  a  perspective  implications.  depression  subjects.  current  psychosocial  supports  f e w e r and  hypothetical  that  as depression-prone  regardless  a n d Arsanow  d i d nondepressed  (1983)  a more  symptoms.  Arieti  suggested  represent  solutions  and D e l l  themselves  skills  functioning.  possible  Zemore  depressive  solving  of social  (1979)  the  submissive  attachment t o extended  (Paykel  depressed  Interpersonal  to  performance,  i n h i b i t e d communication,  restricted  anxious  impaired  o f meaning.  represents In  such  6  instances, rewards  the  and  depressed  individual  satisfaction  i s hypothesized to  vicariously  through  the  o t h e r " r a t h e r t h a t by means o f h i s o r h e r own Taken that  together,  the  depressed  attitudes the  studies  that  extent  social  exhibit  are both  to  of  which  such  and  c o n t r i b u t e t o d e p r e s s i o n remains In  the  factors  and  generally refers  traditional  used  to  i n an  the  environmental Examples  of  analysis  study  and such  the  to  term  individual  would  (Hammen, M a r k s , M a y o l ,  Billings 1981;  Folkman  hypothesized facilitate  &  whether  of  each  possible. negative has  Lazarus,  attempt  be a  list  events  with  &  to  Depressed items  than  recall  Cognitive  by  of  asking  descriptors many  of  1983;  schemas  items  from  are  posited  to  to  recall.  to  judge  them,  and  descriptors  s u b j e c t s have been found t o r e c a l l positive  with  & Lazarus,  subjects  the  and  memory  refers  the  Moos,  1986).  as  selected  depressive  Coyne, A l d w i n ,  are  been  i n that i t  studies  Cronkite,  that  social  has  & deMayo, 1985)  structures  of  or  co-occur.  1984;  assessed  of  of  when  information processing, including may  to  1982,  cognitive  Self-schemas  then  life  Billings,  & Moos, 1981,  study  include  self-schemas  (e.g.,  the  characteristics  of  style  product  outcome  interaction  coping  a  and  Nevertheless,  interaction  the  stressful  skills  of v a r i a n c e sense,  of  research  are  suggest  unclear.  approach  depression,  functioning  limiting.  deficits  "dominant  efforts.  interpersonal  limited  seek  such  lists,  as  more which  been r e g a r d e d as e v i d e n c e t h a t a n e g a t i v e s e l f - s c h e m a i s  7  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d e p r e s s i o n (e.g., Derry & Kuiper, a  prospective  s u b j e c t s who the  study,  et  a l .  (1985)  found  achievement  to  remember  related  more  events,  symptoms  interpersonal)  that  interpersonal  were  i n response  events  than  more to  events  likely  to  than  develop  schema-relevant  other types  of stressful  (i.e., events.  S u b j e c t s showing a dependent s e l f - s c h e m a d i d n o t d i f f e r other  In  showed a d e p e n d e n t s e l f - s c h e m a , a s i n d i c a t e d by  tendency  depressive  Hammen  1981).  subjects  i n their  level  of  self-reported  from  depressive  symptomology. Generally show in  more  with  (1981)  correlated  found  with  analysis.  depressed  active  support, a n d Moos  was  predictive  style, had  but that  fewer  style cannot  were  and  readily  symptoms  the  to  and  strategies,  such  they  engage that  to  Although  ascertained  from  Lazarus  (1981)  subjects, that  wishful  stressors  was  coping  coping  styles  events  direction  seek  thinking.  of  than  adaptive  these  they  act, to  t h e number  stressful  as antecedents,  logical  judge  of depressive severity more  negatively as  could in  &  positively  nondepressed  likely  to  Billings  be  and  found  nondepressed  strategies  before  subjects with  stressors.  have  been  F o r example,  with  more  to  have  Aldwin,  (1984) f o u n d  are construed be  Coyne,  information  Billings more  coping  comparison  subjects  emotional  than  events.  avoidance  in  more  styles  depressive  Similarly,  that  needed  stressful  with  correlated  found  the depressed  passive coping  coping  Moos  speaking,  and  of  coping  causality  studies,  since  8  their  design  (Billings 1986)  i s correlational.  & Moos,  1984; Hammen,  suggests that  predispose more,  experiencing  suggests  that  negative Rachman,  mood  &  expected  t o remember more  experiencing  normal  appears  1982);  o n more  ambiguous  (Billings  characteristics  each  person  social  causality choice as  between  may  than would  between  be  those  can conclude  that  depres-  interpersonal  events  although t h e depressed  coping  responses,  o f coping  style  or interpersonal  point  interactions  o f view  evidence  i s somewhat  of the other as  arbitrary.  models between  constitutes  individuals  circular  and maintenance  persons.  and  part  reciprocal  the traditional  that  ofthe  present.  o f s u b j e c t and o b j e c t ,  Thus,  examine  i s the understanding  exchange  of causal direction,  onset  when t h e y a r e  1984).  of social  i s viewed  somewhat  we  to  Models  i n any s o c i a l  environment  events  and t h a t ,  effect  likely  1981; S u t h e r l a n d ,  relationship  passive  interactional  i n this  Marks,  Further-  t h e depressed  A t most,  & Moos,  Interactional  Inherent  events  events, p a r t i c u l a r l y  any m e d i a t i n g  the  thus,  stressful  mood.  regarding  Social  &  events.  ( e g . , Bower,  Hammen e t a l . , 1985), to rely  evidence  de Mayo,  a r e more  positive  t o be a m o d e r a t e  s i o n and s t r e s s f u l  Social  people  than  Newman,  appear  Mayol,  some  f o r some p e o p l e , d e p r e s s i v e symptoms may  remember n e g a t i v e e v e n t s  (cf.  fact,  them t o t h e o n s e t o f s t r e s s f u l  evidence  there  In  Thus  and t h e i s seen  distinctions  of psychological  phenomena  9  such  as  depression  perspective. boundary  are  In e f f e c t ,  or  meeting  social  environment.  social  exchange.  of  individual  may  be  social  between  the as  well  Several  as  the  this  interactional  the  and  the  medium  of  characteristics  social  environments  caused  products  codeterminants models  the  t h e o r i e s r e p r e s e n t an  traditional  of  of  of  future  depression  the  assumption  generally causality. tend  of  Although  emphasize social  other  made  (eg.  1975;  Lewinsohn,  been t h e  foremost position  behaviour  contingent  was  that  notion  the  Ferster, &  positive  from  reinforcement.  l a c k the  others,  and  social  Shaw,  that their  models  1969),  has  area.  His  a  low  rate  response  hypothesized  to e l i c i t  inability  of  Lewinsohn  rate of  Lewinsohn  to  environment.  1974),  represents  skills  aspects,  related  researcher i n this  depression  models  reciprocal  behavioural  Weinstein,  and  of  social  t h a t i s a c o n s e q u e n c e o f a low  the depressed  responses  theorist  1969;  Although  behavioural  antecedents  w r i t e r s have proposed Burgess,  depression  interactional  psychosocial  (eg.,  1974,  have  f u n c t i o n i n g and  of  position  interpersonal.  (1977)  models  depression  models  explicit,  Bandura's  Behavioural to  factors  i s seldom  encompass  intermediate  psychosocial  m o d e l s t h a t a r e more e x p l i c i t l y  that  of  reciprocally  and  of  individual  represents  f u n c t i o n i n g and  as  from  reviewed.  between  initial  the  T h i s boundary  interaction,  Behavioural  but  arbitrary  From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e  regarded  be  as  i n t e r p e r s o n a l m o d e l s f o c u s upon  place  social  interaction. will  a l s o regarded  to  positive generate  10  social  reinforcement  extinction  schedule.  of the depressed their  social  positive related  reinforcement,  rate  of  with  learning  behaviour  that  depression  be  two  prolonged  an  on  been &  1974)  as  grounds t h a t a  low  extinction  of  explained  introduced a social  in  Katz,  generate  1975)  the has  other  Since  increased low  rate  equated  ways.  interactional  l e s s d e p e n d e n t upon t h e e x t i n c t i o n  intermittent  schedule.  behaviour,  (1974,  causally  criticized  represents  schedules  rates  are  for  theory.  has  the  deficits,  opportunity  factors  Friedman  theory  Lewinsohn  must  (1975) h a s  in  than  decreased  limited  paradigm  reinforcement  than  a  skills  of learning  reinforcement  rather  intermittent  is  these  Seligman  positive  reinforcement  rather  and  extinction by  social  provides  according to principles  commentary  on  I n o t h e r words, t h e s o c i a l f u n c t i o n i n g  environment  inconsistent  p l a c e s them  i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by  Lewinsohn's (see  effectively  of  with  Lewinsohn  hypothesis  that  paradigm:  The s o c i a l environment p r o v i d e s c o n t i n g e n c i e s i n the form of sympathy, interest, and concern which strengthen and maintain depressed behaviours... However, s i n c e most p e o p l e i n t h e d e p r e s s e d person's environment... find these behaviours aversive, they w i l l a v o i d h i m / h e r a s much a s p o s s i b l e , t h u s . . . f u r t h e r a c c e n t u a t i n g h i s / h e r d e p r e s s i o n (p.30). Although  he  Lewinsohn  and  has his  not  tested  colleagues  descriptive  evidence  depression.  They have found  social that  behaviours  i n home  and  from group  this  have  regarding  hypothesis  amassed  a  l a r g e body  psychosocial  t h a t the depressed  others  than  do  interactions,  the  directly,  factors elicit  in  fewer  nondepressed,  depressed  of  and  individuals  11  tend  to  be  behaviour, response,  less  active,  less  more  likely  to  and  tend  person"  i n a group,  likely  than in  Lewinsohn, rated by  as  less  depressed,  and  glow"  depression  of in  favour  of  behaviour  and  depressed  McLean depression  "defined  that  social  simply  addition  et  an  emphasis  increased  placed  as  rate  greater  He  sources  of  (McLean,  instrumental  small  the  disruption  factors  on  the  of  part  1985).  that  p. to such  model  upon  of  social  microstressors,  repetitive  antecedents  current  interactional  emphasis  1976a,  that  affective  behavioural  proposed  the  themselves  normal  self-awareness  outlined a  a  for  suggesting  social upon  rated  observers.  Lewinsohn's  deemphasizes  factors.  to  &  were  whether  similar  for  a l . , 1980).  psychological to  necessary  1976b)  frustration"  principal  tended  (Hoberman & L e w i n s o h n ,  (1976a,  interactional  be  subjects  others,  were  from  Youngren  independent  ratings  more  colleagues  1980;  than d i d observers,  may  model  than  are  (Lewinsohn,  his  depressed  of  "aversive  withdraw  and  or  subjects  skilled  (Lewinsohn  of the  skillful  observer  regulation  scripted  that  nondepressed  "illusory  factors  found  the  individuals  Barton,  social  latency  depressed to  Lewinsohn  interactants,  a s more s o c i a l l y an  such  &  socially  self  sensitive to  Chaplin,  have  themselves,  Whereas  to  others'  delayed  nondepressed  recently,  1980)  a  to  sense t h a t the  the  Mischel,  show  more  response  More  (Lewinsohn,  be  i n the  are  interaction 1975).  to  responsive  personal  303),  and  are  the  depression.  In  as  behavioural  12  productivity,  goal  solving,  cognitive  and  restricted  to  as  probable  that that  co-operative.  In  (1975),  he  to  reinforcing support  conducted  able  affective  approach  the  behavioural  affective  and  despair  extinction. depression  have  others  unwittingly to  i t  eventually  Although  McLean derived found  symptoms  with  avoiding  reinforcing  to  be  has  not  from  his  that by  communication  is  generally  even  generally in In  the  regarded  behavioural  explicitly  emerged  that  avoids  context  r e i n t e r p r e t e d i n terms  Other  by  of  they  using  a  between  spouses.  perspective  hypotheses.  are  responses  (1973)  than  Lewinsohn's  not  clarify  their  to  a)  depressive  to  rather  as  an  ( A m e r i c a n P s y c h i a t r i c A s s o c i a t i o n , 1987),  experience,  interpersonal  critical  by  Grauer  depression  disorder  personal  hypotheses  and  ameliorate  Although  suffer  responding  usually  testing  p a t i e n t s and  often  by  p.313).  Ogston,  to  behavioural depressed  1976a,  research  McLean,  "are  microstressors evidence  the  b)  social  clinical  depression  and  identified  cited  similar  that  problem  disturbed of  hypothesis  attention,  (McLean,  He  behaviour  who  and  and  maintain  people  McLean  competitive  a  depressed  and  depressed  were  are  making,  origins  people  f u r t h e r contended  serve  model,  social  depressed  relationships  with"  self-control,  p r e c i p i t a t e depression.  suggest  can  decision  i n t e r p e r s o n a l communication  interaction t h a t may  setting,  give  of  discussion of  greater  behavioural  models,  pleasure  reinforcement  interpersonal  of  models  emphasis  to  and of the  13  domain  of  social  models w i l l  be  Forrest regarded  that  pattern  facilitates  than  strategy, showed  others that  sharply  or  &  to  avoidance  Several  the  of  disturbed  systems.  They  when  faced  with  were  more  subjects  self-punishment,  as the  of  system  are  Hooper,  and 1971)  interpersonal interpreted  disequilibrium  unacknowledged  They p r e s e n t e d couples  characterized case  with  more  likely  though were sions  by  other to  arousal  Roberts  (1978; a  Hinchliffe,  systems  or  one  systems,  particularly  depressed  behaviour  emerges  when  misinterpreted i n  of  suggest the  that  marital a  of  to  be  symptom  emotional  the  the  partners  as  theory  byproduct  needs  relationship.  interactions  is  depressed  are  tone  couples,  interactions  are  Furthermore,  al-  be  and  disrupted  that by  their  pauses.  than  of  a more n e g a t i v e a f f e c t i v e  interactions of recovered patients with t h e i r  found  coping  depressed  physiological  developed  that  evidence to  wherein  a  1978).  Roberts,  They  stress  stress.  that  of  as  such  self-punishment  levels  1978)  depressed  model o f d e p r e s s i o n t h a t d e s c r i b e s d e p r e s s i o n as a of  such  Hokanson,  interpersonal  depressed  choose  &  of  with  indicating  reduced  Hinchliffe, Lancashire,  coping  following  ( S a c c o & Hokanson,  Sacco  behaviour  aggression,  and  experience.  (1975;  of  escape  evidence  interpersonal likely  Hokanson  self-punitive  a  presented  emotional  reviewed.  and  the  reflecting  and  less  positive  n e g a t i v e , t h e r e were  affect  than  was  the  no  more  case  i s the  spouses expres-  with  the  14  interactions (Hinchliffe  of  depressed  et al.,  1978).  Salzman depression Salzman  (1975) h a s d e v e l o p e d  i n the t r a d i t i o n  contended  observed  patients  that  their  spouses  an i n t e r p e r s o n a l  model o f  of Harry  and  Stack S u l l i v a n  the h o s t i l i t y  i n d e p r e s s i o n i s secondary  that  has  (1947).  often  to the i r r i t a t i n g  been and  d e m a n d i n g b e h a v i o u r o f t h e d e p r e s s e d and t h e manner i n w h i c h others  respond  (1967),  who  negative  of  (1975)  perfectionistic others, loss  loss  initially  that  expectations  contrast  depressed  have  the world,  regarding  to  a  and  the depressed  further  guilty  hostility  individual  respond  support, but that  support.  for  suggested  In  Beck  uniformly  the tend  future, to  themselves  than would  have and  In  such  Salzman  demands  with  reassurances f a i l  Eventually,  become a n g r y , about  their  response, their  In short,  those  to restore posits  reassurance  who  respond  interacting  with  i m p a t i e n t , and i n a t t e n t i v e , y e t  inability  to  the depressed  provide develop  sufficient feelings  companions and i n c r e a s e t h e i r Salzman  as a m a n i p u l a t i v e attempt  that  t o s a t i s f y the  expectations of the depressed,  demands.  toward  support.  t o such  o t h e r w i s e be  then attempts  by m a k i n g demands on o t h e r s .  the depressed feel  the  themselves,  The d e p r e s s e d  perfectionistic with  that  h a s more p e r s o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e  others and  behaviour.  a n d when s u c h e x p e c t a t i o n s a r e i n e v i t a b l y unmet, t h e  the case. the  such  posits  view  Salzman  to  regards depressed  to control  of  demands  behaviour  the behaviour of others  15  that  only  serves  to  alienate  them,  thereby  contributing  further to the depression. Coates disturbed a  Wortman  interpersonal  social  (1975)  to control  seek  feedback  feeling  relationships  o t h e r s , Coates  that,  when from  state.  have  interpreted  the  of the depressed  from  perspective.  In  f o c u s upon t h e d e p r e s s e d  others t o control  contend  (1980)  psychological  Salzman's  of  and  contrast  person's  the behaviour people  suffer  o t h e r s about  They argue  of the depressed. a  loss,  they  that,  d i s t r e s s by c h a n g i n g  to  the situation  others  attempt  behaviour. negatively  to  Coates  1970)  personal  factors (Jones  (1980) s u g g e s t to  find  they  and  that  demands  to  f o r support f o r the  that,  suggest  In  and v a l i d a t i o n . to  change  way, their  that  others  react  because  of  world  bias  Coates  provide  this  change  that  renders  factors for and  Wortman  are l i k e l y  unclear by  common  hypothesis  since the depressed  clarification  depressed  to alleviate  situational  1971).  respond  to  the just  than  responses  seek  to  o r by a t t e m p t i n g  positively.  attributional  Nisbett,  others'  the topic  are depressed  salient  further  are l i k e l y  requests  the  attempt  i n general, others  depressed  including  more &  the  Wortman  who  biases,  (Lerner,  observers  and  t o people  attributional  more  compel  They  the appropriateness of their  the person's at  attempts  a n d Wortman e m p h a s i z e t h e a t t e m p t s  t o e x p r e s s i o n s o f negative a f f e c t with attempts  look  to  feedback,  repeating  Furthermore, are  p e r c e i v e d b y t h e d e p r e s s e d a s b o t h an i m p l i c i t  likely  their  others' to  be  r e j e c t i o n and  16  evidence  of  confirming further  the  their  in  improvement  Coyne  response  that  has  Coyne's  proposed  value of at  depression  generating  reformulated Teasdale,  reviewed role her  of  do  their  symptomatic  be  attributed  a  Weissman  and  model.  Like  of  presented  interpersonal  time  when  Beck,  1967;  Paykel the bore  suggested that  work a  other  to  be  to  the  behavioural 1975)  Blaney,  (Abramson,  theorists  1977;  (1964),  Lewinsohn  of  et  al.  resemblance  interpersonal  Cohen  and  and  formulation  drew  (1954)  to  b e h a v i o u r evokes  &  (1974),  and  Salzman's  theorists, a  from o t h e r s t h a t e x a c e r b a t e s t h e d e p r e s s i o n . d e p r e s s i v e symptoms a s an a t t e m p t  the  Fromm-Reichmann,  Coyne's  Cohen  (1976b)  emphasized  including  Cohen,  the  Seligman,  Coyne  who  (1974).  depressed  articulate  Lewinsohn,  developed.  of  research  a t t r i b u t i o n a l models such as  Baker,  close  model  approach  (cf.  i n depression,  Grinker  an  cognitive  interest  several  (Cohen,  1954),  and  and  factors  colleagues  (1964),  an  (e.g.,  were y e t  work  social  upon  interpersonal considerable  paper  widespread  1978)  Weigert,  ized  (198 0)  change  the  i t can  l e a r n e d h e l p l e s s n e s s model  the  heavily  an  received  F r i e d m a n fie K a t z , 1974),  &  since  experience,  Wortman  demands,  last  position  depression  of  and  depressed  such  to  their  Coates  the  to  has  f o r the  of  i f  (1976b)  attention.  were  that  of  c a u s e s and t h u s d i s c o u n t e d .  depression  argument  fears.  i s unlikely  to extrinsic  models  worst  contend  behaviour  study  inappropriateness  Coyne social  Grinker (1975) (1976b) response  He c o n c e p t u a l -  to restore or a l t e r  a  17  disrupted  social  presented  by  Salzman,  1975).  attempts  space,  other theorists  to  He  elicit  o t h e r s a r e met withdrawal  further effort  false  impel  since in  is  not  in  ones  & Wortman,  1980;  and  depressive's  reassurance  of concern of  To  to  complicate  accept  i t  merely  f o r assurance.  Coyne  induce  of  eventual  withdrawal  unsatisfying  of  pattern  social  of  factors  may  work h a s several to  a  Coyne  account  received.  wide  audience.  (1976a)  interaction undergraduate target  (1976b) for  the  the and  was  depression.  subjects  engage  individuals  not  the  point  unique,  perhaps  two  that  his  literature  more  of  exposure  importantly,  paradigm  that  investigation  of  social  Coyne  had  female  in  who  the  mutually  the  facilitating  experimental  empirical  to  attention  Coyne r e v i e w e d  an  a  to  to  a b l e t o change i t .  model  and  that  develops  p e r s p e c t i v e s , thus  presented  and  empirical  Second,  ability  contributes  support,  seems t o be  First,  theoretical  facilitated  with  Coyne's  others  interaction  where n e i t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t Although  in  depressed  or  emphasized t h a t the depressed's guilt  in  unambiguously,  (1976b) i n i t i a l l y feelings  is  matters,  the  given sincerely  to the manipulative appeal  actual  t o engage  s u p p o r t i v e feedback,  position  and  from  support  individual  assurance.  i t i s u n c l e a r w h e t h e r i t was  response  to  the  absence  depressed  offer a  support  The  to s o l i c i t  e v e n when o t h e r s do  that  expressions  the  similar  (e.g., Coates  postulated  support.  to  argument  restorative  with  of  hypothesized  person  an  a  (1976a) telephone  were  either  conversation depressed  18  outpatients, normal  nondepressed  controls.  group.  There  Coyne f o u n d  depressed  target  willingness subjects. depressed others,  upon  15  more  negative  mood  i n future interactions  or  with a  and  than  did  that rejection  less other  of the  b y t h e i n d u c t i o n o f n e g a t i v e mood i n  shift  guilt  1976b).  outpatients,  subject-target pairs per  (1976a) h y p o t h e s i z e d  slight  emphasis (Coyne,  reported  was m e d i a t e d a  were  health  t h a t s u b j e c t s who h a d i n t e r a c t e d  t o engage Coyne  mental  i n perspective  induction  Coyne  as  (1976a) a l s o  a  from  h i s previous  mediating  found  variable  that  The h y p o t h e s i s t h a t t h e d e p r e s s e d p a t i e n t s w o u l d be p e r c e i v e d as merely e n a c t i n g a r o l e performance, exaggerating t h e i r d i f f i c u l t i e s i n order t o receive sympathy, was c l e a r l y n o t s u p p o r t e d (Coyne, 1976a, p. 189) . Although  i t provided  1976b), Coyne's supporting different not  mixed  support  (1976a) s t u d y p r o v i d e d e x p e r i m e n t a l  the hypothesis social  response  that  from  t h e depressed  others than  (Coyne, evidence  elicit  do p e o p l e  a  who a r e  depressed. During  t h e f o l l o w i n g d e c a d e , numerous s t u d i e s o f s o c i a l  interaction Blumberg Beatty, 1977,  and  depression  & Hokanson, 1985; G o t l i b  have  1983; B o s w e l l &  1978; Hoehn-Hyde,  & Landrum,  Howes,  Hokanson,  & Loewenstein,  Hokanson,  & Heller,  & Rush,  Peters,  & H o k a n s o n , 1979;  & Hammen, &  &  &  1982; Hokanson,  1985; J a c o b s o n  Strack,  (eg. ,  1981; G o t l i b  1982; Hammen  1980; Howes  1984; M a r k s  1985; R o b b i n s ,  published  & Murray,  Schlottman,  Blumberg,  King  been  Robinson,  Sacco,  1982;  f o r h i s model  Coyne,  & Anderson,  1982; M e y e r  &  1979; S t r a c k  &  19  Coyne,  1983; W i n e r ,  Bonner,  research  design  variation  o f Coyne's  been  mixed  i n most  Blaney, of  & Murray,  these  studies  (1976a) e x p e r i m e n t  i n some  areas  1981). has  The  been  and t h e r e s u l t s  b u t remarkably  a  have  consistent  in  others. F i n d i n g s have been c o n t r a d i c t o r y of  depressed  support and  behaviour  relative  Hokanson's  with  t o nondepressed (1979)  undergraduate  Gotlib  and  elicited  1987;  negative  &  Chaplin,  that  King  Beatty,  (Boswell  & Hammen,  found  no  that  King  role,  mildly  depressed  significantly  fewer  directly  evidence  and  Whereas  negative with  & Murray,  regarding  rejection (cf.  a  have  found or  someone  showings  signs  of  1981; Coyne,  1976a;  1978; Howes  & Coyne, mood  four  induction  1979; J o f f e  less  depressed  Gotlib  &  e t a l . , 1985;  1983),  Similarly,  significantly with  Dobson,  actual  Hokanson,  1984).  &  following  & Peters,  &  the  mood  of negative  & Heller,  arisen  s i x studies  1982; Howes  interactions  has  induction  1982; S t r a c k  s u b j e c t s were  future  a depressed  1984).  reported  Marks  1987;  Howes  proposition  1986; J o f f e  1985; Hammen  Robinson,  this  1985; Gurtman,  interactions  depression  Whereas  that  mood  & Heller,  subjects  imagined  enacting  found  controversy  of  Doerfler  supported  of direct  statements.  Considerable issues  findings  (1982)  more s t a t e m e n t s behaviour.  confederates  Robinson  undergraduates supportive  to elicit  r e g a r d i n g t h e tendency  studies  (Gotlib &  Dobson,  ten studies  willing target  &  found  t o engage i n (Boswell  &  20  Murray,  1981; Coyne,  Peters,  1977, 1978; Howes & Hokanson,  1982; R o b b i n s , Winer  1976a; G o t l i b  Joffe  &  Gurtman  (1986)  studies  have  induction remain  1985; Hammen &  1979; M a r k s  & Hammen,  S t r a c k , & Coyne, 1979; S t r a c k & Coyne, 1983;  e t a l . , 1981),  1982;  & Beatty,  but three d i dnot (Gotlib  Dobson,  1987; K i n g  has pointed supported  &  Heller,  Robinson,  1984).  As  out, the majority of published  the predictions  and r e j e c t i o n .  &  o f negative  A t p r e s e n t , however,  mood  these  issues  controversial.  Despite these areas o f controversy, several researchers have  found  response Murray,  from  t h e depressed  others  1981; Coyne,  Robinson, al.,  that  than  1982; Hammen  &  depressives  elicit  statements,  fewer  depressed acceptance who  and  hostile  depressed  overall,  affect,  smiling  1985; Marks  when  found  more  more  suggests  rejection,  interacting  that  this  sort  a face t o face interaction.  To d a t e ,  such d i f f e r e n c e s  more less  individuals  with  & Hokanson,  that  positive  silence,  a n d a r o u s a l t h a n do  1982; Howes  s t u d i e s have n o t found  &  fewer  r e s p o n s e was i n e v i d e n c e a s e a r l y a s t h e f i r s t of  1985; G o t l i b  e t a l . , 1979; S t r a c k & Coyne, 1983;  more n e g a t i v e s t a t e m e n t s ,  (1982)  &  1977, 1978; Hokanson e t  Observational evidence  & Robinson,  Robinson  & Beatty,  social  (Boswell  1979; Howes e t a l . ,  statements  and l e s s  are not  (Gotlib and  Peters,  1980; Howes & Hokanson,  e t a l . , 1981).  a different  do t h e n o n d e p r e s s e d  1976a; G o t l i b  & Hammen, 1982; R o b b i n s Winer  do e l i c i t  strangers  1979).  Gotlib  of  negative  three  minutes  o n l y two p u b l i s h e d i n social  response.  21  B o t h were r e p l i c a t i o n s , one o f C o y n e ' s Heller, study  1984) a n d t h e o t h e r (Joffe  replicated  & Dobson,  the small  Unfortunately, power  Although  relatively  sample  have  1976a;  Gotlib  sizes  the findings  been  limited  differences  o f other  (Boswell  Beatty,  &  1981)  Whereas K i n g  Murray, &  & Coyne,  and H e l l e r  that  may b e t h a t requires  the  phenomena  the bluntness  that  confidence  we  more  studies  with limited s t a t i s t i c a l  between  1982;  that  others  i na first  i s i n striking  contrast  Coates  &  that  their  negative  mood  an a l t e r n a t i v e  sample  sizes  to  Replications  of  power t o d e t e c t  differences  findings.  respond  meeting  negatively  (e.g.,  theorists  (e.g.,  Wortman,  Lewinsohn,  1975; McLean, 1976; S a l z m a n ,  t o the  G o t l i b & Robinson,  to the prediction  evoke s u p p o r t i v e  et al.,  o f our instruments of  i n our findings.  bound t o r e s u l t i n i n c o n s i s t e n t evidence  of  use l a r g e r  achieve  initially  been  1981; Coyne,  (1984) c o n c l u d e d  and r e j e c t i o n a r e l e s s than robust,  people  have  1983; W i n e r  induction  1982)  Kirk,  & Hammen, 1982;  suggest  depressed e a r l y  (e.g.,  Robinson,  findings  The  statistical  studies  e t a l . , 1985; M a r k s  e t a l . , 1979; S t r a c k  are  studies.  differences  1985; G o t l i b  Robbins  measurement  studies  1977, 1978; H o k a n s o n e t a l . , 1980; Howes &  1979; Howes  conclusion  (1982)  both  of the original  the numerical  small  &  Hammen & P e t e r s ,  .  Appropriately,  numerical  consistent,  groups  Hokanson,  1987).  small  (King &  o f G o t l i b and Robinson's  t h e sample s i z e s p r o v i d e d  t o detect  1982).  (1976a) s t u d y  by  several  1980; Coyne,  1976b;  1975) t h a t  depressed  responses from o t h e r s .  As  22  Doerfler from  and  Chaplin  strangers  loved  ones  do  evidence  people  generally  are  depressed,  depressed  not  will  recent  (1985) h a v e  necessarily  respond  in  (Franche  &  do  not  strangers.  argued  between  strangers  model,  and  favour  of  they  not  such  Coyne  interactions  between  interactions  are  expect  to  by  Furthermore,  depression.  strangers, question  model,  factors  Doerfler regarding  with strangers In  the  the more  may  in  a  history  of  the  effort  to  of  come  social  certain  effect  regarding issues  to  (1985)  be  of such  a  all  between meetings complete  interaction  cannot  that  h a v e upon t h e  first  issues  depression  the  of  in  friendship  interactions  study  have  negative  with  Chaplin's  fundamental  since  virtually  and  controversy  studies  valuable,  by  role  Whereas  interpersonal  are  from  between  that  that  of  interactions that  who  (197 6b)  fact  would  understanding  Coyne's  discontinued  argued  that  meetings  the  strangers  the  first  or  begin  of  be  (1985)  mate  relationships  part  withdraw  in  intimate  be  of  differences  suggest  of  test  should  unconfounded  selection.  should  studies  has  friends  Chaplin  and  Indeed,  suggests  would  strangers  or  fashion.  good  and  responses  friends  reject  studies  experiences  that  1987)  adequately  (1985)  such  to  studies  longitudinal  intimates.  Dobson,  laboratory  do  imply  similar  Doerfler  that  that  a  expect  although  further  suggested,  in  related  to  studied  with  p o s i t i o n begs  negative  the  interactions  depressed. the may  specifics have  of  become  Coyne's clouded.  23  Although  the  depressing most  question  remains  crucial  that  t h e depressed  Beatty,  1977,  using  a  Furthermore, all  &  furthering  1987; K i n g o f methods  & Hammen, 1983;  Winer  share  i n turn  test  a n y i n t e r p e r s o n a l model o f d e p r e s s i o n ,  implications researchers the  social  nature  of  others  Robinson,  o f such have  1979; Y o u n g r e n t o such  investigative  1982; Howes  either  behaviour  & Lewinsohn,  behaviour &  two f u n d a m e n t a l  to  (e.g.,  Hokanson,  First,  study  f o r t h e depressed.  their  social  Thus, t o  t h a t t h e depressed  i t i s critical  o f t h e depressed,  depressed  i n others  be e x a m i n e d .  t h e impact  responses  focused  impact  of  Hokanson,  Second,  detail,  t h e assumption  depression.  i n t e r a c t i o n must  t o understand  eta l . ,  a l . , 1981).  a p r e d i c t a b l e response  contributes to further  others.  Gotlib  & Peters,  i n explanatory  of depression  evoke  et  that  on  found  response  1982; R o b b i n s  t h e depressed  have  With  have  1982; Hammen  despite the differences  i s important  our  Heller,  1981; Coyne, 1976a;  that  it  &  a more n e g a t i v e s o c i a l  Coyne,  of depressive  are  e t a l . , 1980; Howes & H o k a n s o n , 1979;  i n t e r p e r s o n a l models  aspects  depressed  and d e p r e s s i o n .  & Robinson,  Howes e t a l . , 1985; M a r k s Strack  in  variety  (Boswell & Murray,  1978; H o k a n s o n  1979;  pursue  & Dobson,  do e l i c i t  1985; G o t l i b  the  i t i s not necessarily the  interaction  (Joffe  researchers  t h a n do o t h e r s &  to  of social  two e x c e p t i o n s  1984),  whether  unresolved,  question  understanding only  of  the  To d a t e ,  attention i n terms  upon  ofthe  ( e g . , Blumberg  &  1980) o r t h e r e s p o n s e  Coyne, 1979).  1976a; As  Gotlib  &  yet,the  24  implications been was  of such  empirically to  social  interactions  f o r t h e d e p r e s s e d have  investigated.  examine  this  impact  of  The  critical the  purpose  issue  response  by  of  this  not  study  investigating  elicited  by  the  depressed  individuals.  Predicting  Social  Impact  Unfortunately, specific  predictions  formulation predict the  i t is difficult  and  that  based  related  relative  nondepressed  to  to derive  theoretically  exclusively  upon C o y n e ' s  research.  Clearly,  the  (RN),  the  would  tend  type  of  type  of  one  response  elicited  by  evoked  by  response  (RD)  mood  in  their  p a r t n e r s , c o n t r i b u t i n g t o what Coyne d e n o t e s  as  depressive d r i f t .  I f RD  induce  would  depressives social  to  (1976b)  i s t o h a v e any  depressed  relationship  to  the  etiology  o r maintenance o f d e p r e s s i o n , i t would c e r t a i n l y  expected  t o i n d u c e n e g a t i v e mood.  Coyne  (1976b)  Wortman, 1980;  and  Salzman,  other 1975)  writers  (e.g.,  a l s o suggested  Coates  be  &  t h a t when o t h e r  people withdraw s o c i a l l y ,  r a t h e r than withdrawing  i n return,  the  makes  to  depressed  reassurance. relatively someone  individual One  exhibiting of  is  to  likely  RD  attempts  would t h e r e f o r e expect t h a t  depressed  acceptance  further  w o u l d be RD.  Another  among t h e  be  commonly e n c o u n t e r .  the By  relatively  type  relatively of  to  people  response who  to  expect  depressed  social  contrast,  someone who  unlikely  reason  elicit  are  reject more  i s that that  is  RD  they  relatively  25  nondepressed  might  toward a person negative, other  To aspects  to their  one  might  measures  acceptance  of  other  social  predict  a  depression  to  make  of the s o c i a l  interactions.  positive  and  In  correlation  measures  predictions  impact  of  social  regarding  other  of the posited  i s less straightforward.  regarding  Coyne's  behaviour  serves  (1976b) as  i n s i n c e r e statements Coyne,  1976a;  1979).  Thus,  Coyne's  rejecting  among i n d i v i d u a l s exposed t o RD.  endeavour  response  t o be r e l a t i v e l y  e x h i b i t i n g RD, s i n c e RD would be u n u s u a l l y  relative  words,  between  be expected  Gotlib  a  hypotheses  predictions  Coyne's as  depressogenic  to  not  (1976b) how  the  that  effort  depressed  that  prompts  i s weak t o n o n e x i s t e n t ( c f . 1982; Howes  derived  do  t h e evidence  from  seem  impact  this  to  formulation  & Hokanson, aspect  of  be  warranted.  does  not provide  of  the  postulated  response might be mediated by t h e d e p r e s s i v e ' s  interpretation organismic  manipulative  & Robinson,  formulation  Furthermore,  At present,  contention  o f support  depressogenic  of that  response.  variables  (e.g.,  Coyne  acknowledges  biochemical  that  factors,  i n t r a p s y c h i c f a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g c o g n i t i o n s ) may c o n t r i b u t e t o depression,  but he does not o f f e r  organismic  and  guidance hypotheses,  interpersonal  regarding  these  any p r o p o s a l s  factors types  may of  as t o how  interact.  predictions  For and  we must look t o o t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l f o r m u l a t i o n s .  I n t e r p e r s o n a l Circumplex  Theories  26  Interpersonal theories of personality (e.g.,  Carson,  based  on  evoke  a  the premise  and s o c i a l  of  dimensions  two-dimensional  two  a l l social  that  1982  In  response  array.  as  circle  These into  dimensions the  as  specific  More  differ  from  system  representing all  cases,  into  described names  articulated  the  study  circular  (see  Kiesler, that  dimensions  1983;  there are  that  dimensions  four quadrants:  specific  may  i n terms  octants. by  hostile-dominant,  t o system,  comparable  they  constructs  the interpersonal  and the  o f 16 v a r i a b l e s  that  1  summarizes  researchers. labelled  A  are generally (cf., Kiesler,  through  when  c o n s i d e r e d as o c t a n t s ) .  P  viewed 1983).  circumplex i s anchored  o f dominance-submission  the  Although  as In  by t h e  ( A - I , o r PA-HI  when c o n s i d e r e d a s o c t a n t s ) a n d h o s t i l i t y - f r i e n d l i n e s s DE-LM  the  within  Table  various  be and  divide  dimensions  o f t h e dimensions  orthogonal dimensions  or  of  a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by a  two  c i r c u m p l e x have been d e s c r i b e d collapsed  of  friendly-submissive,  friendly-dominant.  be  models  various  related  hostile-submissive,  may  to  hostility-friendliness  dominance-submission. interpersonal  tends  model,  has e s t a b l i s h e d  orthogonally  designated  circumplex  Research  f o r reviews)  principal,  Circumplex  facilitates a  1957) a r e  behaviour  response represent a w e l l  behaviour.  of social  1982, 1983; L e a r y ,  response.  measurement  interpersonal  Wiggins,  that  complementary  personality system  1969; K i e s l e r ,  and p s y c h o t h e r a p y  Circumplex  (E-M,  systems  p e r m i t t h e measurement o f b o t h i n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o u r a n d  27  Table 1 Dimensions o f t h e Interpersonal Leary  (1957)  Circumplex  Kiesler et a l . , (1975,1976) Impact Message Inventory  Wiggins (1979)  Kiesler (1983)  p  Success  Exhibitionistic  Ambitious  Assured  A  Power  Dominant  Dominant  Dominant  B  Narcissism  Competitive  Arrogant  Competitive  C  Exploitation  Mistrusting  Calculating  Mistrusting  D  Punishment  Cold  Cold  E  Hostility  Hostile  Quarrelsome  Hostile  F  Rebellion  Detached  Aloof  Detached  G  Distrust  Detached/Inhibited  Introverted  Inhibited  H  Masochism  Succorant/Abasive  Unassuming  Unassured  I  Weakness  Submissive  Submissive  Submissive  J  Conformity  Deferent  Lazy  Deferent  K  Trust  Ingenuous  Trusting  L  Collaboration  Affiliative  Warm  Warm  M  Love  Nurturant/Agreeable  Agreeable  Friendly  N  Tenderness  Sociable  Gregarious  Sociable  0  Generosity  Exhibitionistic  Extraverted  Exhibitionistic  Adapted  —  —  from  Kiesler  (1983) a n d W i g g i n s  (1982).  28  complementary depressed  social  individuals  interpersonal elicited may  responses.  by  can  circumplex,  be  the  described  then  d e p r e s s i v e s may  If  the  be  behaviour  in  terms  of  interpersonal  predicted  and  of the  response  measured,  as  the s o c i a l impact o f t h a t response. Howes and Hokanson (1979) assessed the s o c i a l impact of  depressed behaviour by means o f k i e s l e r ' s Anchin,  Chirico,  Inventory. assess  The  Kyle,  &  Federman,  Impact Message  a person's  responses  cognitions  evoked  by  1979)  Inventory  to a target  b a s i s o f the t a r g e t ' s impact and  (Perkins, Impact (IMI)  Message  i s used  individual  on the person,  the t a r g e t  Kiesler,  on  to the  i . e . , feelings  d u r i n g an  interaction.  The t a r g e t i s thus d e s c r i b e d a c c o r d i n g t o 15 dimensions  that  map  1982  onto  14  of  Interpersonal dimensions  Circle  not  K-trusting. a  different  from The  16  dimensions  (Kiesler,  r e p r e s e n t e d by  depressed  role  nondepressed  pattern  was  of  1983). the  IMI  In Howes and Hokanson's  enacting  sions.  the  The  general  D-cold  (1979) study,  on  remarkably  two  include  impacted  targets  Kiesler's  as a  and  targets  significantly  number o f  orderly:  dimen-  "depressed"  t a r g e t s impacted as g e n e r a l l y h o s t i l e - s u b m i s s i v e r e l a t i v e t o the  "nondepressed"  significantly of  the  targets.  Depressed  targets  h i g h e r than d i d nondepressed  subscales that  comprise  the h o s t i l e  targets and  quadrants, i . e . , submissive, s u c c o r a n t , i n h i b i t e d , ful,  detached,  and  abasive subscale.  hostile.  The  However, K i e s l e r  only  impacted on  each  submissive mistrust-  e x c e p t i o n was  the  (1983) contends t h a t the  29  succorant  and  dimension  of  abasive the  1982  subscales  both  represent  Interpersonal C i r c l e .  although the d i f f e r e n c e  d i d not  the  Furthermore,  reach s t a t i s t i c a l  cance, depressed behaviour tended  t o impact  than d i d nondepressed  I t s absence  behaviour.  same  signifi-  as more a b a s i v e from the  o f s c a l e s t h a t were found t o c h a r a c t e r i z e the s o c i a l o f depressed t a r g e t s i s t h e r e f o r e not t h e o r e t i c a l l y  impact  crucial.  In s h o r t , Howes and Hokanson's (1979) f i n d i n g s suggest depressed falling  behaviour  within  can  be  the h o s t i l e  characterized  and  as  list  that  generally  submissive quadrants  of the  i n t e r p e r s o n a l circumplex. Kiesler that  "a  (1983) has a r t i c u l a t e d  person's  probability  interpersonal  actions  tend  (with  a  g r e a t e r than chance) t o  initiate,  i n v i t e , or evoke from an i n t e r a c t a n t complementary  responses  t h a t l e a d t o a r e p e t i t i o n o f the person's o r i g i n a l  actions"  (Kiesler, According  significantly  the g e n e r a l p r o p o s i t i o n  1983, to  this  pp.100-101, proposition,  s t y l e of d e p r e s s i v e behaviour  emphasis the  hostile  in  original).  and  submissive  (Howes & Hokanson, 1979)  be expected t o evoke complementary responses  would  (RD) t h a t would  l e a d t o f u r t h e r h o s t i l e and submissive behaviour on the p a r t o f t h e depressed. exposed and  would be  more l i k e l y  to exhibit  individuals the  hostile  submissive behaviour c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of d e p r e s s i v e s than  would by  t o RD  One might p r e d i c t , then, t h a t  individuals the  exposed  nondepressed  t o the type of response (RN).  According  to  elicited Kiesler's  30  proposition, probability How  this  significantly  would  described  difference  i n terms  RD  upon  others?  To  date,  both  derived  from  different  implications  depressed  behaviour. system  subsequently Carson's  responses  two  have  themselves  circle?  proposed.  (1957)  was  elaborated  (1969) p o s i t i o n  first  derived by  and by  Kiesler  each  (1983).  has  response t o  widely  Carson  for  Although  work,  most  be  impact  systems  regarding the predicted The  a  In other  the social  general  been  Leary's  with  chance.  c a n b e made a b o u t  complementarity  predictive  predicted  of the interpersonal  predicting were  be  g r e a t e r than  t h e complementary  w o r d s , what p r e d i c t i o n s of  can  known  (1969)  and  Essentially,  i s that:  c o m p l e m e n t a r i t y o c c u r s on t h e b a s i s o f r e c i p r o c i t y i n respect t o t h e dominance-submission axis (dominance t e n d s t o i n d u c e s u b m i s s i o n , a n d v i c e v e r s a ) , a n d on t h e b a s i s o f correspondence i n respect t o the hate-love axis (hate i n d u c e s h a t e , and l o v e i n d u c e s l o v e ) (p. 112) . In  terms  of the four  quadrants  circle,  the  quadrants  a r e complementary,  and  hostile-dominant  friendly-submissive  even  more  suggesting quadrants overall basic  specific that has  a  model.  friendly-dominant dimension  quadrants.  Kiesler  regarding  complement  o f complementarity For  hostile-submissive  o f t h e 16 d i m e n s i o n s  single  pattern  and  example  quadrant  interpersonal  as a r e t h e f r i e n d l y - d o m i n a n t  predictions  each  of the  has  complementarity, within  (see F i g u r e follows  each  (1983) h a s made  i n the friendly-submissive  1) .  Carson's  dimension a  the four  single quadrant.  The (19 69)  within  the  complementary  31  Figure  1  Complementarity  Predicted  Model  Adapted from K i e s l e r  (1983).  According  to  Kiesler's  (1983)  32  This  also  this  holds  f o r the  formulation,  depressives  the  would  hostile-dominant  other  tend  Wiggins  (1982),  Leary's  (1957)  a p p r o a c h was  (self,  o t h e r s ) , and  on  to  circumplex facet  each  resource  implications  for  complementarity one  status  of  (see T a b l e  composition  accept  Foa's  has  as  be to  (1961)  that  suggested  facet  variables.  2).  RD  by  analysis Foa's  (grants,  v i e w e d as oneself  of  (1961)  denies),  He  has  an  and  octants  of  Any  attempt t o  the  another's d e f i n i t i o n  of grant  Wiggins  of f a c e t  elements  interpersonal  variables  complementarity.  situation  type  others.  wherein of the  of  object  f u r t h e r suggested that  interpersonal  predicting a  of  complementary  (status, love).  the  of  a  been  t e n t a t i v e l y proposed a p r o f i l e  describe  behaviour  i n t e r p e r s o n a l behaviour i n terms  i n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o u r can  (1982) h a s  to  dominant.  directionality  and  According  would p r e d i c t , then,  formulation  to describe  love  evoke  interpersonal  facets:  deny  One  and  based  three  or  to  response.  alternative  quadrants.  hostile-submissive  would impact as h o s t i l e An  two  both  would He  the have  defines  parties  would  situation.  F o r example, a m b i t i o u s - d o m i n a n t b e h a v i o r (PA) d e f i n e s a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h s t a t u s and l o v e a r e g r a n t e d t o t h e a c t o r and love, but not status, i s granted to the other. A complementary r e s p o n s e t o ambitious-dominant b e h a v i o r w o u l d be one t h a t c o m p l e t e l y and l i t e r a l l y a c c e p t e d s u c h a d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e s i t u a t i o n (p. 216) . According  to  this  formulation,  behaviour of depressives to  elicit  Figure  2).  further On  the  the  ( o c t a n t s DE,  hostile  and  basis of t h i s  hostile FG,  and  and  submissive  HI)  submissive would  behaviour  system, then,  one  would  tend (see  33  Table  2  Facet Composition  of Interpersonal Variables  Self  Status  Other  Love  Love  Status  +  +  +  -  BC ( a r r o g a n t - c a l c u l a t i n g )  +  +  -  -  DE  +  -  -  -  PA  (ambitious-dominant)  (cold-quarrelsome)  FG ( a l o o f - i n t r o v e r t e d ) HI  (lazy-submissive)  JK  (unassuming-ingenuous)  -  -  +  +  LM  (warm-agreeable)  -  +  +  +  NO  (gregarious-extraverted)  +  +  +  +  Key + =  grants  - =  denies  Adapted  from Wiggins  (1982, p . 2 1 5 ) .  Figure 2 Complementarity P r e d i c t e d A c c o r d i n g t o Wiggin's F a c e t A n a l y t i c Approach  Adapted from Wiggins  (1982).  (1982)  35  predict and  that  RD w o u l d b e c h a r a c t e r i z e d  summarize,  research  evidence  for  three  of  the type  relative  more  would  of  response  t o the type (RN).  likely  predicted  .  according  (Wiggins,  impact  elicited  (RD)  by t h e  t o RD  would  behaviour  Second,  RD  hostile-dominant  (1969) a n d K i e s l e r ' s  (1983)  than  would  be  on t h e  formulations.  t o impact  as g e n e r a l l y  t o a f a c e t a n a l y t i c approach t o  1982).  in  deriving  interpretations  from  others, (Beck,  According  depression  interpretations around  response  RN.  the basis  the depressed  i n d i v i d u a l s exposed  to  recent  Models o f Depression  depressives'  1979)  First,  guidance  depression  social  by  RD w o u l d b e p r e d i c t e d  complementarity  elicit  of  exposed  hostile-submissive  For  elicited  t o impact as r e l a t i v e l y  Alternatively,  and  the social  to exhibit hostile-submissive  o f Carson's  Cognitive  theories  (Howes & Hokanson, 1979) p r o v i d e  individuals  basis  interpersonal  a d d i t i o n a l hypotheses regarding  nondepressed  the  hostile  submissive. To  be  as g e n e r a l l y  them.  we  may  of  predictions  the social  turn  Rush,  t o t h e c o g n i t i v e model,  prone  themselves,  world,  Shaw,  &  personal  experience,  negative  perspective  including i s held  sense,  social to  of  Emery,  t h e d e p r e s s e d and  the future,  i n this  they  theories  c o n s i s t e n t l y make u n w a r r a n t e d  about The  response  to cognitive  1967, 1974; Beck,  regarding  negative  and t h e w o r l d includes  one's  experience.  This  contribute  to  both  the  36  etiology  and  measures o f the  the  have  concurrent Dobson 1983).  been  Shaw,  Based  someone w i t h negatively social  on  would  response  elicited  others  response  &  when  to  by  Breiter, 1983;  1983; Keller,  negative  be  as  predict  to the  the  on  that would  degree  measured  posttest  with  negative  depressives  relative  by  the  the  DAS  measures  type  et  ( c f . , Coyne,  al.,  of  of  of  social  suggested  others  depressed, accurate  tend  their and  Coyne  contend  that and  regarding  the  factors  that  h i s or her  1982;  cognitions  evidence  cognitive  view of Since  1980)  negative  e s t a b l i s h e d , the  individual's  may  would  by  with  between  (1976b)  the  a  depressives.  Coyne  to  with  words, p r e t e s t s c o r e s  correlate  relationship  veridical.  one  cognitive style,  Lewinsohn  i s well  expectations  &  faced  impact  o f t h e c o g n i t i v e model 1983;  one  elicited  negative  equivocal.  negatively  with  Abramson,  significance  be  significantly  Hamilton  etiological  may  Beck,  (Dobson  following experience  the  depression  &  depression  In other  expected mood  although  correlate  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  i s evinced.  Gotlib,  Weissman  as  more  depressive  Critics  to  c o g n i t i o n s , such  (DAS:  c o g n i t i v e model,  increasingly  be  Scale  general,  a d e p r e s s i v e c o g n i t i v e s t y l e would respond  social  a  depressive  In  that  negative  &  the  depression.  would expect  of  which  would  of  1986;  than  type  DAS,  found  response.  h a v e an to  Atttudes  measures  &  of  hypothesized  Dysfunctional  1978),  the  maintenance  the  social to  negative  realistic.  has  been  depressed environment  respond  more  outlook  and  Lewinsohn  et  37  al.  (1980)  step  presented  further.  Their  observer-ratings nondepressed saw  of  themselves  as  an  social  takes  this  compared  found  saw  in  that  them,  argument  depressed  but  regulation.  may  be  that  Such  a  necessary viewpoint  and  depressed  subjects  They  argued  f o r appropriate would  predict  positive  r e l a t i o n s h i p between p r e e x i s t i n g d e p r e s s i o n and  negative  impact  o f RD,  not  because  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s on t h e p a r t unrealistically  positive  of  and  nondepressed  showed a p o s i t i v e d i s t o r t i o n . glow"  one  self-ratings  competence  They  others  "illusory  affective  that  study  subjects.  subjects actually that  evidence  unwarranted  the  negative  of the depressed, but because  interpretations  on  a  the part  of  of the  nondepressed. A  different  Several 1973;  argument  researchers  Suarez,  Curtis,  Crowe,  1968)  sensitive  have  (e.g., &  to aversive  stimuli.  stimuli.  Adams,  may  Thus,  to  1978;  that  stimuli  Lobitz,  arousal  generalize  the  extent  person  may  Persky,  that be  suggested to  are  someone  shows  i . e . , t o show more n e g a t i v e a f f e c t , negative social  expected  that  negative  negatively,  elicited  Wilson,  more  to  depressed.  as  signs  respond in  such social of  more  reaction  s t i m u l u s , such as t h e  by t h e  &  i n 'response t o  that  response t y p i c a l l y  &  depressed  depression,  to a r e l a t i v e l y  conclusion.  than are the nondepressed,  (1974) h a s  also  similar  Zuckerman,  the  i n autonomic  Lewinsohn  hypersensitivity  in a  Lewinsohn,  argued  i n d i c a t e d by d i f f e r e n c e s painful  results  social  38  A third  l i n e o f argument would l e n d f u r t h e r support t o  p r e d i c t i n g a r e l a t i o n s h i p between p r e e x i s t i n g d e p r e s s i o n and a negative a f f e c t i v e reaction t o the kind of s o c i a l evoked by depressed behaviour. Gotlib,  1983  meaningfully The  f o r review)  have  noted  the  a s s e s s i n g c o g n i t i o n s by means  argument  about  Several writers  i s that  their  people  cognitions,  (see Coyne &  difficulty  to  ask  that  of  of s e l f - r e p o r t .  a r e not normally  and  response  reflective  cognitions  be  observed and r e p o r t e d i s t o change t h e i r nature and meaning. Although  d e p r e s s i o n may  e f f e c t s may that  can  not occur  be  depression,  i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g , the  i n terms o f t h e k i n d s o f c o g n i t i o n s  assessed rather  affect  by  than  self-report  instruments.  self-reported  cognitions,  more a p p r o p r i a t e t o a s s e s s as a mediating v a r i a b l e . case,  one would  elicited  by  predict  that  d e p r e s s i v e s may  t h e type have  more  of s o c i a l social  Thus may  be  In any response  impact  for  someone who i s a l r e a d y depressed than f o r someone who i s not depressed.  In  other  words,  d e p r e s s i o n would be expected n e g a t i v e mood f o l l o w i n g  measures  of  preexisting  t o c o r r e l a t e w i t h measures o f  experience w i t h t h e type o f s o c i a l  response e l i c i t e d by d e p r e s s i v e s .  Summary A  review  considerable  of  the  evidence  literature  reveals  has accumulated  response t h a t t h e depressed e l i c i t  that,  although  regarding the s o c i a l  i n o t h e r s , t h e r e has not  39  yet  been an e m p i r i c a l  that  response.  social  Experimental  impact  behaviour  investigation of the s o c i a l  of  were  the  predictions  response  derived  regarding  elicited  from  impact o f  by  the  depressed  several  theoretical  perspectives. According depression, type  to  Coyne's  i t was p r e d i c t e d  o f response  more n e g a t i v e  that  of  (Carson,  1969;  predicted  that  condition  would  subjects  exposed  experimental  On  experience  i n a c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , and  depression  1983;  subjects  a  condition,  would  correlate  complementarity  Wiggins,  exposed  control  condition  complementarity  evoke would  interpersonal  to  of  exposed t o t h e  to  1982), the  show more h o s t i l e - s u b m i s s i v e  hostile-dominant,  predicted  of  model  acceptance of the t a r g e t .  Kiesler, a)  a) s u b j e c t s  exposed t o t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l  pre-existing  the basis  interpersonal  the depressed  s i g n i f i c a n t l y with s o c i a l On  that  mood t h a n s u b j e c t s  b) f o r t h o s e s u b j e c t s measures  (1976a)  would  thereby hypothesis,  reactions  o r more  and  as  supporting  i t  was  experimental  condition, impact  theory  than  b)  the  either  the  more  traditional  hostile-submissive,  as  by a f a c e t a n a l y t i c approach. the  depression  basis  and  of  i t s critics  Lewinsohn  e t a l . , 1980),  negative  mood  condition  would  of depression  Beck's  (e.g.,  i t was  following  (1967)  cognitive  Coyne  predicted  exposure  to  correlate significantly  and d e p r e s s i v e  cognitive  &  Gotlib,  that the  with style.  model  of  1983;  measures o f experimental  prior  measures  40  The  present  hypotheses.  study  Female  questionnaires  to  was  designed  to  test  the  above  s u b j e c t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d p r e l i m i n a r y  assess  preexisting  symptoms, d e p r e s s i v e c o g n i t i v e s t y l e ,  levels  of  depressive  and p r i o r mood.  They  were then asked t o watch a 10-minute v i d e o t a p e d c o n v e r s a t i o n from the vantage  of one  of the p a r t i c i p a n t s  and t o  imagine  t h a t they were i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h the person whose f a c e they saw  on  the  video  monitor.  exhibited  either  depressed  behaviour  Subjects  then  the  or  acceptance,  the  social  mood  Impact  on the  induction  and  using  between-groups  correlations with  Message  by  experimental  interpersonal  a  of  social  means group.  of  by  condition. to  assess  Posttest  measure  of  Inventory,  quessocial  and  the  Hypotheses r e l a t e d t o mood  complementarity  design.  acceptance  multiple  target  elicited  control  were  Hypotheses  of measures of d e p r e s s i o n and  measures  tested  response  subject.  measures,  Interpersonal Adjective Scales.  a  videotaped  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s designed  impact  included  of  female  a more p o s i t i v e  completed  the t a r g e t ' s s o c i a l tionnaires  type  The  and  tested  regarding  cognitive  induced  correlations  style  mood  were  within  the  41  Method  Subjects One They  hundred  were  recruited  undergraduate boards,  twenty  and  newspaper.  by  classes, an  women p a r t i c i p a t e d means  of  appeals  n o t i c e s posted  advertisement  placed  i n t h e study.  on  made  campus  in a  bulletin  neighbourhood  A l l s u b j e c t s had some postsecondary  and  the majority  were  university  The  mean age was 25.0 y e a r s .  to  education  undergraduates  (n=106).  S u b j e c t s who were  eligible  r e c e i v e d e x t r a course c r e d i t f o r t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n  (n=49).  A l l o t h e r s u b j e c t s r e c e i v e d $2.00 f o r r e t u r n b u s f a r e .  Measures Pretest  measures  were  administered  d e p r e s s i v e symptoms, and c o g n i t i v e s t y l e . reassessed  mood  including social  social  assessed  acceptance,  assess  P o s t t e s t measures  interactional  social  mood,  impact,  variables  and  expected  response.  Mood. Today  and  to  Three  form  measures  were  of the Multiple  used  Affect  t o assess  mood: t h e  A d j e c t i v e Check  List  (MAACL; Zuckerman & Lubin, 1965), t h e Wessman-Ricks 10-point elation-depression scale semantic Russell The anxiety,  differential  (W-R; Wessman & R i c k s , 1966), and a  instrument developed  by Mehrabian and  (1974). MAACL  yields  and h o s t i l i t y  three —  that  subscales have  —  been used  depression, by  several  42  researchers  (Coyne,  1976a; G o t l i b  & Beatty,  Robinson,  1982; Howes & Hokanson,  response  to  real  or  imagined  1983; G o t l i b &  1979) t o assess social  depressed o r nondepressed t a r g e t s .  interaction  1965).  and All  reliability  with  observer  three  subscales  coefficients  normal p o p u l a t i o n s . reduce  the  high  used  with  extended  self-report  (Zuckerman  &  Lubin,  shown s i g n i f i c a n t  retest  i n p a t i e n t p o p u l a t i o n s b u t not i n  Although b r i e f e r v e r s i o n s o f t h i s intercorrelations  Zuckerman and Lubin be  ratings have  with  The MAACL s u b s c a l e s have  each demonstrated h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h r e l a t e d measures  mood i n  among  the  scale  subscales,  (1965) recommended t h a t t h e f u l l v e r s i o n  relatively  homogeneous samples because o f i t s  range and c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e n s i t i v i t y t o d i f f e r e n c e s .  Because o f t h e r e l a t i v e  homogeneity o f t h e p r e s e n t  sample,  the f u l l v e r s i o n was employed. The been  Wessman-Ricks  used  to  interpersonal and R i c k s scale.  elation-depression scale  assess  mood  behaviour  in  (Hammen  response  to  & Peters,  descriptive  asks  respondents  mood statements.  High  also  depressed  1978).  (1966) d i d not p r o v i d e psychometric  The s c a l e  has  Wessman  data f o r t h e i r  t o endorse  one o f t e n  scores represent  elated  mood and low s c o r e s r e p r e s e n t depressed mood. The and  semantic  Russell  orthogonal scale's  differential  (1974)  factors:  assesses  s c a l e developed mood  by Mehrabian  according  to  p l e a s u r e , dominance, and a r o u s a l .  s t r u c t u r e has been  confirmed  ( R u s s e l l , Ward, & P r a t t , 1981).  by  factor  three The  analysis  Evidence has suggested t h a t  43  the  three  f a c t o r s of  adequately  pleasure,  d e f i n e a l l emotional  1977) .  T h i s instrument  measure  of  all  three  mood  than  Beck,  measure The  of  BDI  the  Scale  for  behaviour,  Rehm,  Cognitive  BDI  &  The  Beck,  40  items  beliefs  held  Beck's model. cannot  be  happy  to  Each  is  r a t e d on  a seven-point  to  "totally  disagree".  given sample  the of  highest  the  The were  score.  undergraduates,  and  Attitude  has  DAS  Scale  to  two  assess parallel  selected  from " t o t a l l y  was  showed  of the  validated very  high  to  (e.g.,  I know a d m i r e me")  end  by  absence  according  statement  maladaptive The  population.  depression  people  List,  McClure  r e l a t i v e presence or  a  of  Depression  and  originally  scale ranging The  Hamilton  Check  employed DAS  a  of  measures  Oliver,  was  c o n s i s t s of  most  the  Adjective  i n a student  characterize  unless  measures  ratings,  Dysfunctional  that  item  other  is  symptoms.  Zung's S e l f - R a t i n g  style.  each  depressive  with  1978)  on  Inventory  1961)  observational  f o r use  cognitive  Erbaugh,  Bumberry,  r a t i o n a l methods t o r e f l e c t of  &  Depression  1976).  style.  Weissman  depressogenic  the  scores  Depression  s e v e r i t y of  s c a l e , and  (1978) v a l i d a t e d t h e  of  Mock,  Depression,  Low  mood.  including psychiatrists'  (see  forms  and  can  comprehensive  above.  Beck  significantly  t h e MMPI D e p r e s s i o n  (DAS;  The  arousal  ( R u s s e l l & Mehrabian,  described  Mendelson,  correlates  depressed  Scale  those  number  and  i n c l u d e d a s a more  symptoms.  Ward,  depression, Rating  was  states  f a c t o r s represent depressed  Depressive (BDI;  dominance,  "I  that agree"  scale i s with  a  internal  44  consistency,  adequate  correlations  with  retest  reliability,  significant  a n d Hammen's  (1979)  C o g n i t i v e B i a s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (Weissman & Beck, 1 9 7 8 ) .  Other  researchers and  have  nonpatient  Shaw,  t h e BDI a n d K r a n t z  and  reported similar samples  1986; H a m i l t o n  &  & Abramson,  A o f t h e DAS was u s e d Interactional  (Dobson  findings  i n both  Breiter,  1983; Dobson  1983; K e l l e r ,  1983).  variables.  Three  was  adapted  a  13-item  opinion  u s e d by Winer, Bonner, B l a n e y , is  based  Gotlib  on  similar  and Robinson  (1982),  t o s i t next  rated  on a s i x - p o i n t  "definitely  yes".  item  from  one  The s c a l e  Coyne  (1976a),  (1978), and  ( e . g . , "Would y o u  o n a 3-hour b u s t r i p ? " ) i s  ranging  Relatively  by  were  acceptance  (1981).  and P e t e r s  Each  person  scale  used  Hammen  (1980).  to this  scale  and Murray  instruments  Youngren and Lewinsohn like  Form  measures Social  by  &  i n t h e present study.  administered t o assess s o c i a l perception. assessed  patient  from  high  "definitely  scores  indicate  no" t o greater  acceptance. Social target  were  Perkins, which  impact  perceptions  a s s e s s e d b y t h e Impact  Kiesler,  was  and  also  Anchin, used  Chirico,  for a  (1979).  The  cognitive  responses  to a target  dyadic impact  interaction. of  the  characteristics  inventory  the  Message Kyle,  similar  Hokanson  of  I n v e n t o r y (IMI;  & Federman,  purpose  assesses  person  experimental  by  1979),  Howes a n d  affective  and  i n the context of a  S c o r e s o n t h e IMI r e p r e s e n t t h e s o c i a l  target  person  rather  o f t h e respondent.  than  representing  F o r example,  the f i r s t  45  item of the Dominant s u b s c a l e i s "When I am w i t h t h i s  person  she makes me  of  such  feel  items, and  points)  to  bossed  around."  responses may  "very  much  The  range  so"  (4.0  from  a dimension  (Dominant,  Competitive,  Hostile,  Inhibited,  Submissive,  Exhibitionistic). to  exhibit  good  unpublished  Recent  There  Mistrustful,  of  the  p o i n t s of the  Agreeable,  Nurturant),  Exhibitionistic), and Submissive To response  circumplex: Dominant  Hostile  (Hostile,  subscales  of  of the  1979)  was  (Affiliative,  (Dominant,  Competitive,  of  IAS  representing  16  devised.  consists  a s m a l l m o d i f i c a t i o n of  The  IAS  shows  more  the  (IAS; best  o f the instruments d e r i v e d from  of  interpersonal  interpersonal t r a i t s .  social  Interpersonal Adjective Scales  collapsed into octants.  assess  Detached),  their  (1957) c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n ( K i e s l e r , 1983). the  to  be  Friendly  subjects' self-perceptions  circumplex s t r u c t u r e of any  form  may  o f the f o u r  Mistrustful,  t o the v i d e o t a p e d t a r g e t ,  the s h o r t form  Leary's  Trapnell,  (Submissive, Abasive, S u c c o r a n t ) .  assess  Wiggins,  subscales  &  c o l l a p s e d i n t o c l u s t e r s c o r e s r e p r e s e n t i n g each cardinal  style  Sociable,  (Wiggins 15  15  Deferent,  data have shown the IMI  Twelve  (1.0  are  Abasive,  structure  90  Detached,  Affiliative,  circumplex  data).  "not a t a l l "  of i n t e r p e r s o n a l  Succorant,  Nurturant,  consists  points).  s u b s c a l e s , each measuring  Agreeable,  IMI  The  64  interpersonal dimensions  that  The s h o r t adjectives can  be  s c a l e s were designed t o assess  In the p r e s e n t study, they were used  short-term  interpersonal  inclinations.  46  Subjects  were  asked  to  vividly  imagine  themselves  i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h the v i d e o t a p e d t a r g e t , and then t o i n d i c a t e the e x t e n t t o which each IAS  item would a c c u r a t e l y d e s c r i b e  t h e i r response t o the t a r g e t .  Videotape Stimulus M a t e r i a l Each  subject  watched  a  10-minute  videotape  of  simulated conversation.  The t a r g e t person was  of  were both experienced i n t h e a t r i c a l  two  female a c t o r s who  improvisation. videotapes.  There were two  of  that  they  had  in a  needed t o  been  conversation with  r e p r e s e n t the  reported  in  the  kinds  the  of  literature  target.  differences  regarding  response  t h a t a depressed  person e l i c i t s  response  t h a t someone who  i s not depressed t y p i c a l l y  & Robinson,  1982;  Howes & Hokanson, 1979).  elicits  Four  Gotlib  videotapes  were produced, such t h a t each v i d e o t a p e p o r t r a y e d one of a c t o r s e n a c t i n g one of two types o f  the  instructed to  an empty c h a i r was  actor.  For  a l l four  acquaintance  in  a  process.  study Her  of  seated  p l a c e d below the tapes,  t o p o r t r a y an undergraduate  participate  two  responses.  To a c h i e v e the f i r s t g o a l , the a c t o r was the camera and  the  as compared t o the  from a s t r a n g e r (Coyne, 1976a; G o t l i b & Beatty, 1983;  facing  the  the tapes would be a b l e t o assume the  participating  Second,  i n producing  one  F i r s t , they had t o p r e s e n t a s i t u a t i o n i n which  the s u b j e c t s watching role  main g o a l s  p l a y e d by  a  social "partner"  who  each had  camera,  actor  was  volunteered  interaction would  facing  be  and  the  another  47  v o l u n t e e r who (1976a) had  was  watched people  conversation  was the  had  would  to  videotapes. participated off-camera  Thus  the  The  person  receive information  only  subjects  watched  a  responses d u r i n g the  This  told  that  two  but  that  the  one  so  that  person.  In  her s i d e o f the c o n v e r s a t i o n  s i l e n c e s f o r her phantom p a r t n e r ' s videotape  imagined  of  an  eventually  been dubbed out  about  Coyne  chose.  who  were  seemingly t a l k i n g toward them, and they own  they  conversation, had  As  were t o have  subjects  subjects  i n the  f a c t , the a c t o r improvised left  before.  about anything  described  v o i c e o f the they  had not met  i n s t r u c t e d h i s s u b j e c t s , they  unstructured scenario  someone she  and  responses.  someone  who  c o u l d imagine  was their  silences.  To a c h i e v e the second g o a l , d i f f e r e n t i n s t r u c t i o n s were d e v i s e d f o r each of the r e s e a r c h c o n d i t i o n s .  Since  evidence  had been i n c o n c l u s i v e r e g a r d i n g the i s s u e s of n e g a t i v e mood induction  and  were omitted the  i n the  experimental  " p a r t n e r " was r i g h t now, The  statements  condition,  and who  direct  instructions  someone who  conversation  of  the  was  support,  given  to  actor  was  these  the  actors.  told  would  begin  as  any  other,  but  negative  statements,  more  silence,  l e s s acceptance,less  animation,  In her life  tended t o take a n e g a t i v e view of t h i n g s .  the a c t o r would f i n d h e r s e l f responding  less  that  not v e r y happy w i t h her  progressed  statements,  issues  less  s m i l i n g , l e s s eye  pleasantness  v e r b a l statements than normal.  fewer  The  of  expression,  IMI was  as  it  w i t h more positive contact, and  fewer  used t o g i v e the  48  actor  more  Hokanson  i n f o r m a t i o n about  how  t o respond.  (1979) had found t h a t depressed behaviour  as more h o s t i l e and submissive than nondepressed On a copy  o f t h e IMI p r o t o c o l ,  corresponding  make  r e p r e s e n t i n g the  The a c t o r  was  they  told  her f e e l .  Such  items  included t o put  F o r t h e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , t h e a c t o r was t o l d  h e r " p a r t n e r " was  that  behaviour.  r a t h e r be a l o n e " and " I should do something  her a t ease." that  impacted  items would be somewhat d e s c r i p t i v e o f how  " p a r t n e r " would  "she'd  t h e items  s u b s c a l e s were c i r c l e d .  that the c i r c l e d her  Howes and  would  generally  enjoy  happy  each  with  other's  her l i f e  company.  and The  c o n v e r s a t i o n would b e g i n i n much t h e same way as t h e other one,  but as  responding  i t progressed  with  more  the actor  positive  would  statements,  find  herself  fewer  negative  statements, more acceptance, more s m i l i n g , more eye c o n t a c t , more animation,  more p l e a s a n t n e s s o f e x p r e s s i o n , and more  v e r b a l statements than i n t h e o t h e r c o n v e r s a t i o n . was a g a i n p r o v i d e d w i t h a copy items  were  subscales, for  from  the  following  nondepressed  o f the IMI, but t h e c i r c l e d  appropriate  friendly  and  dominant  (1979)  findings  R e p r e s e n t a t i v e items  included  Howes and Hokanson's  behaviour.  The a c t o r  "she enjoys b e i n g w i t h people" and " I can ask h e r t o c a r r y her  share  of the load".  Once  t a p i n g was  complete,  a c t o r s were d e b r i e f e d about t h e nature o f t h e study.  the  49  Verification The  of Videotape  differences  c o n f i r m e d by trained  between  the  two  conditions  behavioural coding procedures  observers  conditions. research  Content  who  The  were  observers  assistants.  videotapes  that  coding  procedures  were  (Gotlib  were  to  not  used on  Robinson,  was in  two and  undergraduate conducted  the  those  1982;  by  hypotheses  female  training  modelled  &  as  were  Observer  sample  investigators  blind  conducted  were  using  study.  used  Howes  by  &  The other  Hokanson,  1979). Verbal  behaviour  exclusive categories, Hokanson five into  (1979)  minutes  of  response  equivalent. u n i t was  and  was  according to  f o l l o w i n g the system Gotlib  each  and  Robinson  videotaped  units,  Based  coded  each  primarily  p l a c e d i n t o one  mutually  u s e d by Howes and (1982).  The  c o n v e r s a t i o n was  containing on  six  a  i t s content,  of the following  divided  sentence each  first  or  response  categories:  1. Direct support: reassuring, sympathetic, or e m p a t h i c r e m a r k s , o r any p o s i t i v e a p p r a i s a l o f t h e i m a g i n e d partner or her a t t r i b u t e s . 2. Conversation maintenance, positive content: f a v o u r a b l e d e s c r i p t i o n s other than of the imagined p a r t n e r , a s s e s s m e n t o r p r e d i c t i o n c o n c e r n i n g s e l f , hometown, w e a t h e r , and s o on. 3. Conversation maintenance. neutral content: r e s p o n s e s t h a t h a v e no e v a l u a t i v e c o n t e n t . 4. Conversation maintenance. negative content: n e g a t i v e e v a l u a t i o n s other than o f the imagined p a r t n e r , d e s c r i p t i o n s or d e p i c t i o n s concerning s e l f , the experiment, s c h o o l , and s o on. 5. D i r e c t n e g a t i v e : p u n i s h i n g o r i n s u l t i n g remarks or other expressions of displeasure or disapproval directly r e l a t e d t o the imagined p a r t n e r . 6. Silence: no verbal response to an apparent statement or q u e s t i o n o r i g i n a t i n g w i t h the imagined p a r t n e r .  50  Nonverbal Youngren  and  (1982).  A  variables  were s e l e c t e d  Lewinsohn  10-second  (1980)  interval  employed t o code t h e f i r s t conversation.  The  at  Gotlib  and  eye c o n t a c t —  was  on a  smiling,  scale  3 = smiling  videotaped  rated  smiling  —  on the  2 =  or laughing); f a c i a l  ( p l e a s a n t n e s s and a r o u s a l ) —  partner  mean  (1 = not s m i l i n g ,  fully  was  proportion of intervals  of the i n t e r v a l ;  3-point  by  Robinson  procedure  f i v e minutes o f each target  used  t h e t a r g e t was l o o k i n g toward h e r imagined  the beginning  based  those  time-sampling  videotaped  f o l l o w i n g measures: wherein  and  from  rating  slightly  expression  mean r a t i n g s based  on 7-point  scales. T a b l e 3 summarizes the r e l i a b i l i t i e s behavioural  coding  data.  Since  the  f o r the videotape small  number  of  c o n v e r s a t i o n s p r e c l u d e d t h e use o f mean r a t i n g s , t h e u n i t o f analysis  f o r observer  observation,  reliability  i . e . , response  unit  estimates  f o r v e r b a l behaviour  time i n t e r v a l f o r nonverbal behaviour. was  good  smiling.  f o r verbal  behaviour  The r e l i a b i l i t y  was t h e s i n g l e  and  Observer f o r eye  of the f a c i a l  and  reliability contact  expression  and  ratings  was somewhat lower. T a b l e 4 summarizes t h e means f o r t h e b e h a v i o u r a l coding data.  The  experimental  means  confirm  that  group  showed l e s s  the  videotapes  eye c o n t a c t ,  l e s s pleasantness  and a r o u s a l , l e s s  n e g a t i v e content,  and fewer v e r b a l statements  c o n t r o l group v i d e o t a p e s .  positive  The s m a l l numerical  less  f o r the smiling,  content, than  more  d i d the  differences  51  Table 3 R e l i a b i l i t y E s t i m a t e s f o r Videotape B e h a v i o u r a l Coding  Reliability  Data  Estimates  Variable  Verbal  Behaviour 2  Eye  Contact  Smiling  Kappa  85  .70  94  .83  92  .79  Pearson r  .87  3  F a c i a l Expression  .75  Pleasantness  .65  Arousal Categorical  data.  Dichotomous c a t e g o r i c a l data. Rated on a 3-point Rated  % Agreement  on 7-point  scale.  scales.  52  Table  4  Mean R a t i n g s  o f Videotaped  Targets'  Behaviour by C o n d i t i o n  Condition Variable  • Experimental  1 Eye  Control  62  88  1. 17  1. 55  Pleasantness  3. 40  4. 23  Arousal  3. 68  4 .82  1. 75  2. 50  4. 25  24. 00  35. 75  49. 25  12 . 50  1. 50  0. 25  0. 25  0. 00  0. 00  54. 50  77. 50  Contact  Smiling  2  3 Facial  Expression  4 Verbal  Behaviour  Direct  Support  Conversation  Maintenance  Positive Neutral Negative Direct  Content Content Content  Negative  Silence Total  Statements  Figures eye  represent contact.  proportion  Figures  represent  mean r a t i n g s on a 3 - p o i n t  Figures  represent  mean r a t i n g s on 7 - p o i n t  Figures represent conversation.  o f time i n t e r v a l s  mean f r e q u e n c y  during  showing  scale.  scales.  5 minutes o f  53  between t h e two c o n d i t i o n s a r e comparable in  the  literature  Hokanson,  (Gotlib  &  t o those r e p o r t e d  Robinson,  1982;  Howes  &  1979).  Procedure S u b j e c t s were t o l d t h a t t h e study was an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of how people respond social  to different  interactions.  were asked  After  t o complete  interpersonal  completing a consent  a preliminary  styles i n form  they  set of questionnaires  i n c l u d i n g measures o f mood (Wessman-Ricks e l a t i o n - d e p r e s s i o n s c a l e , M e h r a b i a n - R u s s e l l semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l mood MAACL), d e p r e s s i v e symptoms style  (DAS) .  They  were  scales,  (BDI), and d e p r e s s i v e c o g n i t i v e  then  asked  t o watch  a  10-minute  v i d e o t a p e , w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s t o a l l o w themselves t o r e a c t as though they were a c t u a l l y meeting t h e person whose f a c e they saw  on t h e s c r e e n .  The v i d e o t a p e  r e p r e s e n t e d one o f two  a c t o r s p o r t r a y i n g one o f two c o n d i t i o n s , response e l i c i t e d elicited  by t h e depressed o r t h e type o f response  by t h e nondepressed.  v i d e o t a p e was made randomly. videotape,  subjects  (Wessman-Ricks  e i t h e r t h e type o f  Assignment Immediately  completed  elation-depression  measures scale,  of subjects to a f t e r viewing the assessing  Mehrabian-Russell  semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l mood s c a l e s , MAACL), and s o c i a l (social  acceptance o p i n i o n s c a l e ,  Interpersonal  Adjective  Scales).  d e b r i e f e d as t o t h e purpose  mood  impact  Impact Message Inventory, S u b j e c t s were t h o r o u g h l y  and hypotheses  the method o f p r e p a r i n g t h e v i d e o t a p e s .  o f t h e study and  54  Results  Subject C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s To a s s e s s t h e e q u i v a l e n c e o f groups, a 2 by 2 ( a c t o r by condition)  multivariate  analysis  of variance  (MANOVA)  was  conducted u s i n g a l l o f t h e p r e l i m i n a r y measures as dependent variables.  No  (F(9,108)  =  significant  0.90),  interaction  effects  condition  were  (F(9,108)  (F(9,108) = 0.75).  found  =  0.63),  or  their  The sample mean f o r t h e Beck  Depression Inventory was 6.64 (SD = 5.26). for the Dysfunctional  f o r actor  The sample mean  A t t i t u d e s S c a l e was 120.94 (SD=24.68).  Between Groups Comparisons Mood.  The group means and standard d e v i a t i o n s  of the  p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t mood measures a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 5. The  first  hypothesis  would  induce  mood,  relative  confirm actors  that  that  negative  mood,  t o the control there  were  t h e experimental  no  posttest  (ANOVA)  was  condition.  differences  mood v a r i a b l e s .  statistically  cases),  actors  condition. analysis  conducted  A of  Since  significant  were  one-way  variance  (MANOVA)  <  was  to  t h e two  analysis of  of  equivalent  repeated  order  between  none o f these (F(l,118)  depressed  In  f o r each  considered  condition  particularly  i n terms o f induced mood, a u n i v a r i a t e  variance  was  more  was  the  seven  comparisons  1.98  in  within  measures conducted  all each  multivariate to  d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two c o n d i t i o n s w h i l e t a k i n g  assess initial  Table  5  Mood M e a s u r e s ;  Cell  Means and S t a n d a r d  Deviations  Pretest  (Time 1)  Posttest  (Time 2)  Measures Experimental  Control  Experimental  Control  6. 28  (0. 96)  6. 10  (0. 84)  5. 75  (0. 86)  6. 45  (0 .70)  Pleasure  38. 00  (V. 69)  37. 83  (6. 75)  32 .43  (6. 62)  36. 82  (6 .41)  Arousal  30. 50  (6. 38)  29. 18  (6. 67)  26. 75  (6. 45)  30. 95  (6 .80)  Dominance  32. 70  (5. 76)  32. 15  (6. 19)  34. 12  (5. 78)  32 .78  (5 . 35)  Hostility  7. 45  (3. 45)  7 .53  (2. 65)  8. 77  (3. 64)  7. 40  (3 .37)  Depression  13 . 98  (5. 67)  14 .43  (5. 34)  16. 22  (4. 94)  14 .05  (4 .07)  6. 73  (3. 06)  7. 20  (3. 13)  7. 83  (2. 50)  6. 40  (2 .45)  Wessman - R i c k s  Elation  Scale  Mehrabian - R u s s e l l A f f e c t  Scales  M u l t i p l e A f f e c t A d j e c t i v e Check  List  Anxiety  Note:  Cell  means a r e c o l l a p s e d a c r o s s  actors.  56  mood i n t o account. condition, effect tests  F(7,112)  =  no s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r  1.65.  There was  f o r Time, F(7,112) = were  control  performed,  for  Pleasure .002,  There was  using  familywise  s c a l e met  5.76, the  error.  the  p  <  significant  .001.  the  procedure  to  Mehrabian-Russell  probability  F(1,118) = 22.19, p < .001.  main  Univariate F  Bonferroni  Only  critical  a  level  of  p  =  A comparison o f the means  i n d i c a t e s t h a t s u b j e c t s r e p o r t e d more p l e a s u r e a t p r e t e s t (M = 37.92, SD = 7.21) There condition variables the  than a t p o s t t e s t (M = 34.63, SD = 6.86).  was  also  and  time,  met  the  p_  <  significant F(7,112)  critical  Wessman-Ricks  24.98,  a  =  interaction 5.84,  probability  the  <  level  elation-depression  .001),  p  for  .001.  Four  o f p_ =  .002:  scale  Mehrabian-Russell  effect  (F(1,118)  Pleasure  =  scale  (F(l,118) = 10.60, p_ < .002), the Mehrabian-Russell  Arousal  scale  (F(l,118)  =  17.84, p  <  .001),  Anxiety  scale  (F(l,118)  =  14.12, p_ <  .001).  the  interactions.  subjects  in  decreases  in  (t(59)  =  5.03,  From  the  <  (t(59) .001),  =  and  the  to  3  4.00,  p  arousal  <  illustrates  the  condition  posttest,  showed .001),  (t(59)  .001), accompanied by an i n c r e a s e i n a n x i e t y E < .001.  MAACL  Figure  pretest  experimental  elation p  the  and  =  sharp  pleasure 4.18,  p  <  (t(59) = -3.26,  For s u b j e c t s i n the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , t h e r e were  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t mood scores. Depression  The  experimental  group's  scores  on  the  MAACL  s c a l e changed i n the p r e d i c t e d d i r e c t i o n , but  i n t e r a c t i o n d i d not reach s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e ,  the  F(l,118)  57  F i g u r e 3.  Time by c o n d i t i o n  i n t e r a c t i o n s f o r 5 mood v a r i a b l e s .  W E S S M A N - R I C K S ELATION S C A L E  MEHRABIAN-RUSSELL PLEASURE SCALE  6.6-  4 0 -  6.4  38  z  LiJ  CC  O  6.2  =3  !  s  LJJ  Ul  (/)  <  _l  36  3 4 -  Q_  5.8H  32  3 0 -  5.6  TIME 1  I  TIME 2  F(1,118)=24.98, P  TIME 1  .001  F(1,118) = 10.60, P  MEHRABIAN-RUSSELL AROUSAL SCALE  8.2  31  < ZD  29  7.8  >-  i—— x  O  CC  .002  M A A C L ANXIETY S C A L E  3 2 -  30  TIME 2  7.4  7-  28  <  6.6-  27  6.2-,  26  TIME 1  TIME 2  F(1,118) = 17.84, P  TIME 1  .001  TIME 2  F(1,118)=14.12, P  .001  M A A C L DEPRESSION S C A L E  16.5  16  Legend  2 15.5H CO £  15  CC  £]  Q  , 4  -  A  EXPERIMENTAL CONDITION  X  C O N T R O L CONDITION  5  14 13.54  TIME 1  TIME 2  F(1,118)=8.18, NS  58  =  8.18, p_ =  least  .005.  partially  would  have  In general,  supported.  required  related  support  f o r the hypothesis  Full  interactions  Complementarity.  The  cluster  scores  g r o u p means presented  significant there was 8.46, the  Five  E = .001. specific  collapsed  by  of variance  actor main  .002).  Bonferonni  rate.  2  effect  Univariate  procedure  The  f o r these v a r i a b l e s are 2  (actor  (MANOVA)  by  condition)  was c o n d u c t e d t o There =  (F(12,105)  was  1.14),  to control  no  n o r was  = 1.89).  f o r condition,  There  F(12,105)  f o r familywise  v a r i a b l e s met t h e c r i t i c a l  =  using error  probability level of  be d i s c u s s e d  i n terms o f t h e  hypotheses t o which they a r e r e l a t e d .  According  to  Kiesler's  (1983)  predicted  that  subjects  exposed  condition  would  describe  their  towards  i t s four  F t e s t s were p e r f o r m e d ,  These v a r i a b l e s w i l l  by  Interpersonal  into octants.  (F(12,105)  effect  assessed  into  hypotheses.  interaction effect  significant p <  A  complementarity  a significant a  was  deviations  6.  analysis  scale  hypotheses  were  and t h e  a n d t h e IAS was c o l l a p s e d  i n Table  the  IMI  and s t a n d a r d  multivariate test  The  three  complementarity  means o f t h e Impact M e s s a g e I n v e n t o r y Scales.  two  scale.  to interpersonal  Adjective  for  t h e M e h r a b i a n - R u s s e l l Dominance  t h e MAACL D e p r e s s i o n Interpersonal  h y p o t h e s i s was a t  significant  additional variables: and  the f i r s t  their  those subjects  partners  as  proposition, to  own  the  experimental  expected  hostile-submissive  exposed t o t h e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n .  i t was  behaviour  relative  to  The c e n t r e  59  Table 6 G r o u p Means a n d S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s Circumplex  f o r Interpersonal  Measures  Group F(1,116)  Measures Experimental  Impact Message  Control  Inventory  Dominant  27. 13  (6. 16)  30. 83  (9. 14)  6. 73  Hostile  34. 43  (9. 34)  26. 40  (7. 86)  25. 75*  Submissive  34. 87  (9- 10)  29. 42  (6. 08)  14 . 58*  Friendly  34. 83  (9. 02)  43. 88  (8. 24)  35. 81*  2 iterpersonal Adjective  Scales  PA  (ambitious-dominant)  38. 20  (7. 23)  35. 13  (6. 13)  5. 72  BC  (arrogant-calculating)  23. 38  (7. 71)  24. 72  (7. 99)  0. 82  DE  (cold-quarrelsome)  23 . 3 3 ( 1 0 . 26)  20. 12  (9. 18)  3 .26  FG  (aloof-introverted)  33. 40  (9. 51)  27. 3 3 ( 1 0 . 17)  HI  (unassuming-submissive)  28. 82  (7. 26)  31. 32  (7. 51)  3 .32  JK  (lazy-ingenuous)  39. 82  (6. 27)  42. 03  (6. 02)  1. 16  LM  (warm-agreeable)  41. 43  (8. 12)  45. 07  (8. 18)  5. 92  NO  (gregarious-extraverted)  38. 37  (9. 45)  44. 80  (9. 02)  14 . 73*  *p_<. 002 . 1 2  IMI  scales  collapsed  IAS  scales collapsed  into cluster into  octants.  scores.  11. 36*  60  of  the  hostile-submissive  Aloof/Introverted variable  yielded  conditions,  subjects.  group  experimental and  11.36, p  showing  subjects  dominant  IAS  of  friendly-dominant  Gregarious/Extroverted) critical  control  subjects  subjects.  critical  was  There  scale  None  of  level.  interpersonal  two  lower  the  a  on  other  To  did  the  the  centre (NO;  that  met  14.74, p  <  scale  than  did  met  the  variables  summarize,  Kiesler's  .001.  (1983)  findings.  hypotheses  social  experimental condition  r e l a t i v e t o the  control  condition.  Based  (1969)  experimental  condition  the  dominant than analysis  the  more h o s t i l e and  not  should  in  the  impact  condition. the  critical  reach  as  position, more  Wiggins'  alternative  experimental  submissive.  scores reached the did  Carson's  control  resulted  hypothesis that  score  on  predicted  regarding the  impact of  that  that  circumplex  this IAS  alternative  the  control  than  difference  t h i s study's  complementarity  did  represents  of  in  suggest  partners  that  this  significantly less  F(1,116) =  the  s u p p o r t e d by  were  to  showed  level,  with subjects  be  the  between  evidence to  by  predicted,  than  quadrant  scored  probability  proposition  As  scores  their  also  probability  Experimental  .001,  is  toward  The  <  expected  subjects.  the  IAS.  higher  there  control the  represented  a significant difference  Furthermore,  friendly  is  s c a l e of the  F(1,116) =  experimental  the  (FG)  quadrant  condition  Three of  the  hostile (1982)  and facet  complementarity should four  probability level.  significance,  the  F(l,116)  IMI The  =  impact  as  cluster Dominant  6.73,  n.s..  61  There  were  significant  = 25.75, £ < .001), and  Friendly  Hostile  and S u b m i s s i v e  were made  regarding  performed  social  analysis  subjects  of the target  i n the control  significant  effects  (M =  of  W i t h i n Groups  were  supportive of  specific  were  a 2 by 2  variance  A significant  condition  showed  36.48,  SD  =  p  remaining  group  These c o r r e l a t i o n s , t h e c o n t r o l group,  ranging  13.55)  (M = 49.15,  <  .001. social  than d i d  SD =  f o r actor,  was  13.71).  F(l,116)  =  F ( l , 1 1 6 ) = 1.26.  only.  hypotheses They  pertained  involved correlations  as w e l l  are presented  from  to  the  of the  acceptance.  as t h e corresponding f i g u r e s f o r  f o r the experimental  i n value  performed,  by  effect  less  a n d t h e DAS w i t h m e a s u r e s o f mood a n d s o c i a l  correlations  (actor  (ANOVA)  25.18,  found  predictions  Comparisons  three  experimental  and t h e F r i e n d l y  =  condition  or f o rthe interaction,  The  no  F(l,116)  i n the experimental  acceptance  The  hypothesis.  acceptance,  f o r condition,  .001),  g r o u p a s compared t o t h e  the findings  Although  univariate  found  0.37,  were h i g h e r  t o a s s e s s group d i f f e r e n c e s .  Subjects  BDI  In short,  Acceptance.  condition)  No  scores  (1982) f a c e t a n a l y t i c  Social  (F(1,116)  ( F ( l , 1 1 6 ) = 14.58, p_ <  i n the experimental  group.  Wiggins'  was  Submissive  on t h e H o s t i l e  ( F ( 1 , 1 1 6 ) = 35.81, p < .001) s c o r e s .  s c o r e was l o w e r control  differences  i n T a b l e 7.  The i n d i v i d u a l  g r o u p were a l l q u i t e low,  -.32 t o +.20.  Individual  u s i n g the Bonferonni procedure  tests  to control  were  62  Table  7  Within  G r o u p s C o r r e l a t i o n s o f P o s t t e s t Mood w i t h  Depressive  Symptoms  (BDI) and C o g n i t i o n s  Pretest  (DAS)  Group  Experimental  Control  measure BDI  1  DAS  2  BDI  DAS  -.32  .14  -.01  .26  Pleasure  -.23  -.02  -.08  -.25  Arousal  -.03  -.01  -.03  -.24  Wessman - R i c k s E l a t i o n  Scale  Mehrabian - R u s s e l l A f f e c t  Scales  i  -.07  . 03  -.14  -.21  -.01  . 07  -.04  -.06  Depression  .20  . 12  . 08  .33  Anxiety  . 14  . 16  . 10  . 29  . 00  . 15  . 11  . 01  .16  .07  Dominance M u l t i p l e A f f e c t i v e A d j e c t i v e Check  List  Hostility  S o c i a l Acceptance Opinion  C o m p o s i t e Mood  All  1  Score  values n.s.  BDI = B e c k D e p r e s s i o n  2  Scale  Inventory  DAS = D y s f u n c t i o n a l A t t i t u d e s S c a l e  63  familywise  error  rate,  and  none  of  the  values  was  significant. Statistical analyses  because  correlations In  power  order  of  was  constrained  for this  the  relatively  large  (32) a n d t h e r e l a t i v e l y  to  improve  statistical  p r o c e d u r e was i m p l e m e n t e d the  within  groups  correlations, acceptance  hypotheses  mood  component  o f t h e seven  group. .04  score  Rotated  was  measures  of pleasure  (-.50),  and p o s i t i v e  anxiety arousal linear  (.88), (.04).  derived  ranged  characterized correlations composite  value  from  Negative  the  were  score  were  f o r the  scale  mood  scores  principal  value  were  from  found  for  and dominance  f o r measures (.73),  consisted and  of and  of  could mood.  the Opinion quite  The  experimental  g l o b a l l y negative  also  social  t o .88 f o r t h e  (-.70),  score  4  score.  the f i r s t  a be  The  S c a l e and  low, r a n g i n g  in  I n d i v i d u a l t e s t s were p e r f o r m e d , and  none o f t h e v a l u e s  was  find  r e l a t i o n s h i p s among  within-groups  mood  that  with  the  depression  o f t h e BDI a n d DAS w i t h  .00 t o .16.  DAS,  found  factor  as representing  mood  reduction  tested  loadings  (.86),  composite of  data  i n absolute  elation  loadings  hostility  combination  be  from  arousal  (-.81),  The  a  the  mood v a r i a b l e s  scale.  of  sample s i z e ( 6 0 ) .  and a composite  f a c t o r scores  anxiety  could BDI,  f o r the Mehrabian-Russell  MAACL  the  the  Scale,  composite  power,  number  f o r t h e mood v a r i a b l e s , s u c h  including  Opinion  small  s e t of  significant.  m e a s u r e s o f mood a n d s o c i a l  In short,  attempts t o  t h e BDI,  a c c e p t a n c e were  DAS,  and  unsuccessful.  64  Discussion  T h i s study's between groups f i n d i n g s may be regarded as supportive  o f an  depression. negative  interpersonal  The  approach  implications  mood i n d u c t i o n ,  of  the  results  of  regarding  i n t e r p e r s o n a l complementarity, and  m e d i a t i n g v a r i a b l e s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d summary  t o t h e study  of the current  status  i n t u r n , f o l l o w e d by a  of interpersonal  models o f  depression.  Negative Mood The impact first that  Induction  purpose o f t h i s r e s e a r c h  was t o examine t h e s o c i a l  o f t h e response evoked by depressed behaviour.  and most fundamental p r e d i c t i o n was t h a t t h e response t h e depressed  evoke  i n t h a t experimental group s u b j e c t s  i n anxiety  condition; not  i n elation,  however,  pleasure,  supported  control  the negative  as bored  subjects.  mood t h a t  subjects  the  and an  was induced i s  might j u s t  and anxious r e l a t i v e  Whether such  exposure i s a q u e s t i o n studies  by  and a r o u s a l ,  affective  The p o s t t e s t as a c c u r a t e l y  t o t h e mood o f discomfort  f u r t h e r degenerate i n t o more depressed mood w i t h  other  induce  were found t o  n e c e s s a r i l y c h a r a c t e r i z a b l e as depressed.  described  to  f o l l o w i n g exposure t o t h e experimental  mood o f t h e experimental be  was  tend  findings,  increase  hypothesis  would  mood.  decreases  This  i n others  negative  show  The  f o r future research.  of s o c i a l  would  prolonged  In contrast t o  i n t e r a c t i o n and d e p r e s s i o n  (e.g.,  65  Coyne, Winer  1976a; Hammen & P e t e r s , 1978; G o t l i b e t a l . , 1981),  measures  o f mood,  affective  study  relied  e n a b l i n g a more  response.  subsequent  this  Any f u t u r e  to social  upon  fine  may  three  separate  grained analysis  studies  interaction  & B e a t t y , 1985;  o f changes  benefit  of  i n mood  from  such  an  the sort  of  approach. Although affective  social  contribute these  the relationship  to  d i s c o m f o r t found  the depressive  findings  find  new  contact, social  To  Feeling  may  Thus,  feel  n e e d s met  instead  gratification, feelings  of  depression. actually Bandura,  pathology  of  1986). a  being  social For  they  impotence  the  protective  circumstances  that  of  may  social of  attempt  when social  get  their  contact.  comfort  and  contribute  to  exacerbate  the  interaction  may  self-efficacy  (cf.  o f d e p r e s s i v e s may i n Rather  be a s e c o n d a r y  are l i k e l y  to  may  isolation  function.  adaptive  of  may  faced with the  unable  that  feelings  p e r s e , i t may  when  source  depressed,  The s o c i a l  feelings  of interpersonal  a  that  able t o generate, the  interactions  from  individual's  are  itself  individuals  i n need  and a n x i o u s  b y means  social  detract  serve  that  may  the extent  depressed  contact that they are t y p i c a l l y  interpersonal  the  bored  study  contradictory  contacts.  yet feeling  depressed  fact  cycle.  experiencing  social  direct,  i n this  are generalizable,  themselves  meeting  i s less  to  than  sign  prevent  t o induce  even  —  a  sign  of  a sign of exposure  more  to  negative  66  mood.  In l e a r n i n g  negatively From  theory  terms,  social  isolation  may be  reinforced. the t r a d i t i o n a l  Lewinsohn,  1974),  behavioural  the negative  mood  perspective  (e.g.,  induction findings of  t h i s study c o u l d be i n t e r p r e t e d as evidence t h a t t h e k i n d o f social  response  reinforcing. example  loss  since  reinforcing  of  an  (social  much  usages,  may  that  effectiveness  has  be  sense  found  any  to  to  be  induce  r e i n f o r c e m e n t has  to learning  that  as an  (Costello,  expected  been  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e term  the  i s not  be i n t e r p r e t e d  would  contact)  of i t s connection  in  by t h e depressed  also  reinforcer  event  n e g a t i v e mood. lost  elicited  The f i n d i n g s  of  1972),  typically  theory  ostensibly  i n some pleasant  circumstance may be d e s i g n a t e d as a r e i n f o r c e r r e g a r d l e s s o f its  functional  Support  relationship  for a  functional  learning  to  theory  instrumental  approach  requires  reinforcement  o r punishment  depends  consequence i n c r e a s e s o r decreases whether  the  unpleasant.  consequence Withdrawal from  social  response  support  a negative  hand,  an  increase Salzman  that  a  r e l a t i o n s h i p be demonstrated between a behaviour  or c l a s s o f behaviour and i t s consequences. of  behaviour.  elicited  (1975)  have  upon  whether t h e  t h e behaviour,  be  deemed  not upon  pleasant  or  someone e x h i b i t i n g t h e k i n d o f by  depressed  reinforcement  extinction i n social  can  The d e s i g n a t i o n  paradigm behaviour, predicted.  behaviour  paradigm.  would much  predict as Coyne  Although  On  would  t h e other an  initial  (1976b) and  such p r e d i c t i o n s  67  were not made a t the o u t s e t of t h i s study, p r e s e n t would  tend  to  support  a  negative  reinforcement  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , s i n c e s u b j e c t s i n the experimental expressed  significantly  less  interest  evidence  condition  i n future interaction  w i t h the t a r g e t than d i d s u b j e c t s i n the c o n t r o l  condition.  F u r t h e r experimental r e s e a r c h would be r e q u i r e d t o e v a l u a t e specific  r e i n f o r c e m e n t hypotheses.  For example, a n e g a t i v e  r e i n f o r c e m e n t model would p r e d i c t a r e d u c t i o n i n a r o u s a l and anxiety  in  subjects  interaction  with  who  were  someone  allowed  exhibiting  response t h a t the depressed e l i c i t , measures when withdrawal  Interpersonal This  study's  be  turn.  discussed  in  the p r e s e n t  predicted  The  evidence  that and  of  experimental  Hokanson, premise  of  and  from  social  depressed  condition  1979).  implications  stem  complementarity  evoked  assumptions  models  theory.  proposition,  a  as  the  of As  social the  resembling  the  both  (Kiesler,  has  in  depressed  supports  theory  the  portrayed  response  of  T h i s evidence  complementarity  will  interpersonal  behaviour  behaviour  that  The p r e s e n t evidence  both  (1983)  findings  implications  fundamental  theory.  encompass  Kiesler's  hostile-submissive  complementarity  theoretical  interpersonal  from  complement  of  but an i n c r e a s e i n such  methodological  u n d e r l y i n g complementarity  depression  kind  from  i s prevented.  interpersonal  and  implications  the  withdraw  Complementarity  have t h e o r e t i c a l  from  to  the  1983)  (Howes  &  central and  the  68  implicit  assumption  depression  (e.g.,  Hinchliffe  et  depressed  underlying a l l interpersonal Coates  a l . , 1978;  behaviour  others that  &  i n turn e l i c i t s  evidence sonal  response  strangers affect  a  the  that  group.  and d e p r e s s i v e s o c i a l  response  from  behaviour.  These  affective  to the interper-  typically  increase  behaviour.  i s required to establish  that  In short, the present  depressed an  1976b; is  w i t h t h e more n e g a t i v e  can c o n t r i b u t e t o  research  predictable  t h e n o t i o n t h a t exposure  that  Coyne,  1975),  more d e p r e s s e d  of the experimental supported  1980;  Salzman,  evokes  f i n d i n g s a r e a l s o congruent responses  Wortman,  models o f  elicit  i n both  in  negative  Naturally,  further  the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y  of  this conclusion. The  facet-analytic  complement and  of depressed  submissive  prediction behaviour  (Wiggins,  (Carson,  1969; K i e s l e r ,  present  evidence.  Although  traditional 1969;  Kiesler,  cautiously,  since other  equally  viable.  complementarity  occurs  all  octants  such  circumplex that  similar  rather  the  any  style  1982)  in  as  hostile  hostile  patterns  should  example,  on  the basis  (Carson,  interpreted  of the evidence  i t  is  feasible  between  may a  tend  may that  o f correspondence  Such  the  facet-analytic  be  i n interactions style  and  by t h e  challenge  supporting  For  strangers.  than  findings  interpretations  interpersonal  social  1 9 8 3 ) , was s u p p o r t e d  1983), t h e e v i d e n c e (Wiggins,  the  impact  p r e d i c t i o n s o f complementarity  predictions  be  would  1982),  dominant  that  for  strangers, to  tendency  evoke  a  toward  69  i n t e r p e r s o n a l correspondence c o u l d have s u r v i v a l v a l u e f o r a social  species,  since  humans need t o be a b l e t o cooperate  and t o bond w i t h one another survive.  An  ( c f . Bowlby, 1969) i n o r d e r t o  innate capacity  someone e l s e ' s  t o match  may be r e q u i r e d  phenomena as empathy,  our e x p e r i e n c e t o  f o r such  fundamental  m o d e l l i n g , and e a r l y  social  human  learning.  Furthermore, t h e r e i s some evidence t o support t h e argument of  social  Dilemma  correspondence studies  (cf.  O'Connor,  competitive  stance on t h e p a r t  Baker,  a c o m p e t i t i v e stance  circumplex terms,  strangers.  Carson,  Wrightsman,  induces  &  between  1979;  Prisoner's  Wiggins,  1972) have  found  1980; that  a  of a confederate eventually i n return.  In  interpersonal  t h i s would suggest t h a t h o s t i l e - d o m i n a n c e  evokes h o s t i l e - d o m i n a n c e i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n .  O r f o r d ' s (198 6)  r e c e n t review o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l complementarity r e s e a r c h a l s o suggests  that  hostile-dominance  hostile-dominance. traditional  is  O r f o r d ' s review  assumptions  regarding  frequently  further  met  with  indicates  that  complementarity  require  f u r t h e r examination i n t h e l i g h t o f c o n t r a d i c t o r y evidence. Another of  this  alternative to a facet analytic  study's  complementarity  findings  interpretation i s that  i tis  p o s s i b l e t h a t complementarity p a t t e r n s between s t r a n g e r s may differ  from  growing there  those  between  familiarity, may  individual response  be  to  frequency  increasing  such  intimates.  that  depressed  and  intimacy  frustration an  initially  behaviour  F o r example,  with  with  of contact,  the  depressed  hostile-submissive may  change  to  a  70  h o s t i l e - d o m i n a n t response o r t o s o c i a l withdrawal. that the marital be  critical  competitive the  Evidence  i n t e r a c t i o n s o f depressed p a t i e n t s tend t o  (e.g., Hooley,  1986; Hooley  e t a l . , 1986) and  ( c f . McLean, 1976) may support t h e argument t h a t  spouses o f depressed p a t i e n t s e x h i b i t a h o s t i l e - d o m i n a n t  interactive style i n their marital interactions. developing Dobson,  1987) c o u l d  shifting Such  relationships  research could  large  samples  ( c f . Howes e t a l . , 1985; J o f f e  be employed  complementarity  Studies of  to test  the hypothesis of  patterns with  perhaps  growing  be accomplished  of r e l a t i v e l y  intact  groups  intimacy.  by that  following would  expected t o generate c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , such as f i r s t undergraduates  i n r e s i d e n c e , new  members, new graduate forces  recruits,  fraternity  students i n l a r g e  and so on.  &  and  year  sorority  departments,  If shifts  be  armed  i n complementarity  p a t t e r n a r e found f o r depressed behaviour, they may a l s o be expected  for  circumplex.  other  Further  dimensions  of  complementarity  the  interpersonal  research  i s clearly  indicated. Although  Wiggins'  interpersonal confirmation, hypotheses.  (1982)  complementarity i t may be used F o r example,  facet  analysis  requires  t o generate  an i n t e r e s t i n g  of  empirical  further  testable  q u e s t i o n emerges  r e g a r d i n g t h e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between n e g a t i v e mood and a hostile-submissive  interpersonal  style.  Wiggins'  (1982)  f a c e t a n a l y s i s o f t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l circumplex would suggest that  a hostile-submissive  social  stance d e n i e s both  status  71  and  love  to  concomitant readily  the  of  such  to  such  to  expected  love  to  feelings  hold  of  frustrated Coyne,  Hinchliffe  1975;  social  present  testable  et  1978;  al.,  study  terms  of  that the  social  also  may  be  receive  at  would  be  absence  of  1975)  account  of  1983;  Hooley,  demonstrated  or 1980;  for  that  the  Brown 1986;  a  the seem  depressed &  Harris,  Lewinsohn,  1974). combination  interpersonal circumplex theory,  traditional  suggests  between  Wortman,  Weissman & P a y k e l ,  hypotheses.  social  or  Salzman, &  and  relationships that  Moos,  with  can  Such  social  reinforcement.  of  love  approach  and  be  status  and and be  models  to  perspective  can  of  may  regarding  S o c i a l exchange  reinforcement  exchange  an  generate v i a b l e  reinforcement  behavioural  be  short-lived  prediction  environment &  augment  of  status  interactants  (Coates  of  would  that  in  presence  I t may  Cronkite  compatible  nature  deny  result  1976b;  control  social  sufficiently  the  the  complementarity theory  research  the  of  natural  that  predict  This  quality  exchange t h e o r y ,  interpersonal  a  hostile-submissive to  the  status.  Monroe e t a l . , 1983; The  of  1975).  and  the  Billings,  would  (Coyne,  quantity  since  might  one  be  hypothesis  posited  one  regardless  Salzman,  characterize  1978;  and/or  guilt  1976b;  (e.g.,  are  might  i n t e r a c t i o n s where t h e y may  interpersonal  diminished to  least  seek out  some  a  Furthermore,  interactions At  mood  position,  participants,  relationships. inclined  Low  interactions  both  strangers,  least  a  researchable.  complementary love  actor.  theory  understood (Foa,  in  1961) .  72  Interpersonal  circumplex  theory  likely  individual  differences  to  relative range  be  importance  of  of  these  interpersonal  suggests  two  styles  that  in  the  there  are  absolute  and  factors,  resulting  in a  (Wiggins,  1982).  Such  i n t e r p e r s o n a l s t y l e s can be expected t o be d y s f u n c t i o n a l t o the  extent  t h a t they  Interpersonal people  are  rigid  complementarity  tend t o seek out  and  social  1983;  Wiggins,  interactions  regarded  as  that  (Leary,  suggests  1957).  further  t o evoke responses  from  that  others  world view of s o c i a l exchange  1982).  In  confirm  intrinsically  extreme  theory  t h a t tend t o c o n f i r m t h e i r own (Kiesler,  and  reinforcement  one's  reinforcing.  complexity of s o c i a l reinforcement may  world  view  Thus the perhaps be  terms, may  be  range  and  understood  and p r e d i c t e d i n terms o f the a v a i l a b i l i t y o f l o v e , s t a t u s , and this  confirmation analysis  of  is  address Eastman's depression  for  one's  personal  somewhat  the  view.  speculative,  it  Although  may  help  to  (1976) c r i t i c i s m of b e h a v i o u r a l models of their  "curious  r e g a r d i n g r e i n f o r c e m e n t parameters" Despite  world  apparent  narrowness  of  outlook  social  exchange  (p.280).  compatibility  of  and s o c i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t theory, s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n a l models represent  a  significant  Kiesler,  1982;  Kuhn,  models.  Like  behavioural  interpersonal refutable  1970)  circumplex  research  paradigmatic from theory theory  hypotheses;  shift  traditional (cf. can  an  &  behavioural  Skinner,  yield  however,  (Anchin  1987),  precise  and  interpersonal  approach d i f f e r s from a b e h a v i o u r a l approach i n a t l e a s t  two  73  important ways. theoretical  an i n t e r p e r s o n a l approach p r o v i d e s a  model wherein  intrinsically behavioural behaviour  First,  affect  embedded, position  (e.g.,  in  that  and  contrast  these  Skinner,  social to  the  factors  1971).  experience  traditional  are  Second,  secondary  of  causality  simultaneously designate regarded be  any  this  that  antecedent  particular  as  depression  are  behaviour futile;  such  c h o i c e over to a  whether  primary  arguments may  To  other i s always  another. affect, cause  of  analogous  to  f o l l o w s bad  or  be  m e t e o r o l o g i s t s a r g u i n g whether good weather bad weather f o l l o w s good —  is  consequence. or the  a  circular  evidence can  as  represents  A  phenomenon  one  arbitrary  p e r s p e c t i v e , arguments or  a  choice, since  t o support one  cognition,  any  and  occurence  as an a r b i t r a r y  generated  From  an  assumes  to  i t assumes  c i r c u l a r r a t h e r than l i n e a r model o f c a u s a l i t y . model  are  evidence can be found f o r e i t h e r  argument and the argument t h a t p r e v a i l s may  have more t o do  w i t h the a b i l i t y of i t s adherents t o p r e s e n t t h e i r case than with  the  f i t of  c a u s a l i t y may (Pepper,  the  model  more r e a d i l y  1942);  to  reality.  facilitate  however, t h i s  c h a l l e n g e t h a t has been met  may  L i n e a r models  theoretical  regarded  as  t o some degree by  a  of  precision technical  interpersonal  circumplex t h e o r i e s . Assumptions important (cf.  implications  Bandura,  causality  regarding  would  the  nature  for c l i n i c a l  1986). predict  A  causality  r e s e a r c h and  perspective that  of  research  have  practice  assuming  circular  attempts  to  find  74  s p e c i f i c psychosocial e t i o l o g i c a l  antecedents  to  depression  i n a d u l t s u b j e c t s would y i e l d modest o r i n c o n c l u s i v e r e s u l t s at  best,  since  antecedent this  designation  i s regarded  prediction  decade  ago,  as  an  appears t o  Blaney  of  a  particular  arbitrary  f i t the  (1977)  event  choice.  available  reviewed  what  were  p s y c h o l o g i c a l models of d e p r e s s i o n , as  by  theories  Seligman  of  (1975).  regarding  Lewinsohn All  antecedents etiological  three  the  has  been e q u i v o c a l a t b e s t .  focus over of  the  response  1980),  to  focus  depression ness  Beck,  Kovacs,  cognitions  have  yet  depression  (see  Coyne  learned and  predictions  but  empirical  to  be &  support  these  models shifted  from an emphasis on reinforcement  factors  (Lewinsohn,  phenomena  &  demonstrated i t s u s e f u l -  Hollon,  1977),  e s t a b l i s h e d as  of  1983,  depression  for  depressive  antecedents  to  review).  The  (Seligman,  1975)  i t s r e f o r m u l a t i o n (Abramson, Seligman & Teasdale,  have  encountered  1978;  Coyne & G o t l i b ,  have found  limited  considerable 1983;  utility  loss  (Lewinsohn, e t a l . ,  self-awareness  has  Gotlib,  h e l p l e s s n e s s model  from  and  Whereas c o g n i t i v e therapy f o r  (Beck e t a l . , 1979)  (Rush,  represented  made  on  (Hoberman & Lewinsohn, 1985).  the  models  positive  current  A  (1967),  intervening years,  the  then  Lewinsohn's model has  1975), t o an emphasis on s o c i a l  date,  Beck  predictions derived  contingent  an  (1974),  to depression,  for  To  evidence.  foremost the  as  criticism  (e.g.,  1978)  Costello,  M i l l e r & M o r e t t i , i n press) in predicting  G o l i n , Sweeney, & S h a e f f e r , 1981;  depression  and  (e.g.,  Manly, McMahon, Bradley, &  75  Davidson,  1982).  have a l s o met  S t r e s s and  w i t h modest support  Such i n c o n c l u s i v e not  yet  persist circular  f i n d i n g s may  achieved s u f f i c i e n t  also persist  coping  of  (Billings  of  evidence  or  depression  & Moos,  p e r s i s t because  t o the e x t e n t t h a t  in fields  models  1984).  r e s e a r c h has  rigour.  They  l i n e a r models of  may  causality  study where r i g o u r o u s a p p l i c a t i o n  c a u s a l models  may  be  more germane  of  ( c f . Bandura,  1986). Attempts persist because  in of  to  the  designate face  the to  prevention,  choice  clinical of  and  inclusive  findings,  relevance  practice,  consequences  of  in  hypothesized  terms  interventions,  and  perhaps  of  primary  prevention  of  I f they c o u l d be i d e n t i f i e d , d i s c o v e r y o f s p e c i f i c  etiological for  such  apparent  antecedents  relapse.  of  antecedents  primary  antecedents  could conceivably lead  prevention  efforts.  to  Similarly,  targets  etiological  antecedents c o u l d c o n c e i v a b l y be made the focus o f  specific  clinical  relapse.  The  interventions  c o n t i n u i n g quest  i n an for a  agent f o r d e p r e s s i o n may  attempt  to  specific  prevent  psychological  causal  r e p r e s e n t an example o f the triumph  o f hope over evidence. Social  interactional  theorists  contend  that,  rather  than r e f l e c t s p e c i f i c e t i o l o g i c a l antecedents, p s y c h o l o g i c a l difficulties learned  an  such  as  depression  interpersonal  extreme (Anchin & K i e s l e r , Wiggins,  1982).  They  style 1982;  further  develop that Carson, assert  when  is  people  both  1969; that  rigid  Leary,  have and 1957;  interpersonal  76  t r a i t s are developed i n the context  of s i g n i f i c a n t  personal  r e l a t i o n s h i p s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the f a m i l y o f o r i g i n . extent  that  depression  represents  a  To  the  hostile-submissive  i n t e r p e r s o n a l s t y l e , primary p r e v e n t i o n would be expected t o be  required  family  during  environments  Coopersmith, rewarding  1967;  access  an  McLean,  family  both  providing  to  build  1976)  style.  and In  environments  love  prevention  unlikely  help  interactional  to  primary  by  children  and  of  prospect,  environment are Although  to  promote  facet  that  depression  would  widespread  a  more terms  depression  children  provided  From  (cf.  analytic  wherein  status.  since  this be  could  them  with  perspective, considered  changes  in  an  family  improbable. an  pessismistic  style  with  self-esteem  Wiggins, 1982), primary p r e v e n t i o n of  require  develop  that  interpersonal  (Foa, 1961; would  childhood,  interpersonal  regarding  perspective  be  prevention,  relapse  p r e v e n t i o n would be expected t o be more promising.  Hooley's  (1986; Hooley important in  not  et  Rush  et  relapse.  medication  treatment  a l . , 1986)  Although  and/or  suggests  a l . , 1977),  i f the  probability  1986).  Furthermore,  sources  (e.g.,  1985;  that  i t is  accumulated Cronkite  can  be  context achieved  cognitive-behavioural  McLean & H a k s t i a n ,  client  of r e l a p s e  Billings,  recovery  individual  (Beckham & Leber,  f a m i l y , the  research  t o ignore the c l i e n t ' s c u r r e n t f a m i l y  preventing  through  primary  would  returns  i s high evidence &  Moos,  to  1979;  a  hostile  (Hooley  et a l . ,  from  several  1983;  Brown  &  77  Harris,  1978;  Lewinsohn, 1974)  Hinchliffe  1975;  Monroe  et  et  al.,  1971;  a l . , 1983;  Hooley,  Weissman  1986;  & Paykel,  suggests t h a t the p r o b a b i l i t y i s h i g h t h a t a depressed  person w i l l  e x p e r i e n c e an a v e r s i v e  social  environment.  To  compound matters f o r the c l i e n t , t h e r e i s a l s o evidence t h a t the  depressed  stimuli  are  (e.g.,  more  Suarez,  Persky, & C u r t i s ,  sensitive  than  Crowe,  Adams,  1968).  &  others to 1978;  aversive  Zuckerman,  Although i n d i v i d u a l treatment  may  be a b l e t o a m e l i o r a t e such s e n s i t i v i t y a t l e a s t t e m p o r a r i l y , marital  and  family  interventions  G l i c k , 1985; Hafner, 1986; may  be  required  Alternatively, social  skills  networks. 1982)  to  facilitate adults  develop  may  new,  to  others  will  responses,  relationships  i n t e r a c t i o n a l mode.  tend  study's  addition  change.  acquire  supportive  the  social  for  that  evoke to  would  different  changes  support  in  the  the new  to  their  hypotheses.  theoretical  research  c o r r e l a t i o n a l design.  implications,  complementarity methodology,  r e g a r d t o measurement, sample s i z e ,  demonstrated  to  Rigorous treatment outcome s t u d i e s are  interpersonal  implications  study  to  1973)  develops a new mode o f  contributing  r e q u i r e d t o t e s t such c l i n i c a l In  need  &  I n t e r p e r s o n a l p s y c h o t h e r a p i s t s (Anchin & K i e s l e r ,  complementary client's  lasting  more  would p r e d i c t t h a t a c l i e n t who  relating  Clarkin,  Haley, 1976; McLean e t a l . ,  to  depressed  ( c f . Haas,  findings particularly  this have in  and experimental v e r s u s  In terms o f measurement, the p r e s e n t  that  the  Interpersonal  Adjective Scales  78  (IAS;  Wiggins,  measure  as  1979)  well  importantly,  may  as  i t has  a  et  al.,  complementarity. demonstrated relatively measures  employed  IMI  of  expensive  social  to  actual  and  The  IAS  such  IAS  it  of  significant circumplex  the  group measures  differences.  This  would  be  combination  have  coding  traditionally  systems  human c a p a c i t y  Although  such  observation,  as  the  (e.g.,  to  in  questionnaire  the  IMI  and  of  positive Thus,  augment o b s e r v a t i o n a l  differences represent finding  factors  is  found in  for  6  IAS  convey a d d i t i o n a l  proportion  Table  the  process  smiling i n a conversation.  means  of  Moreover,  data.  sensitivity  for assessing s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n .  differences  interpersonal  been  Levenson & Gottman, 1983),  innate  be  (IMI;  has  i s s u e of sample s i z e i s r e l a t e d t o the  inspection  may  interpersonal  conversations.  can e c o n o m i c a l l y  of c u r r e n t instruments  numerical  the  this  studies  information.  statements or time spent the IMI  more  utility  apply  observational  upon the  data  Perhaps  assess  p r o v i d e i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t may to  state  that  their  measures cannot r e p l a c e d i r e c t  meaning  meaningful  conversations,  Hooley, 1986;  capitalizes  complex  that  interactional  Gottman, 1979;  a  measure.  to  imagined  studies  social  as  the Impact Message Inventory  straightforward to  whereas  trait  1979)  Now  in  used  a l s o demonstrated  used i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h Perkins  be  reveals the  relatively  that  An the  interpersonal small  consistent in  other  depression  (e.g.,  with  numerical the  small  studies Coyne,  of  1976b;  79  Gotlib  &  Robinson,  1982;  stimuli  were  videotaped findings, similar  and  the  numerical  differences,  instruments  f o r measuring  power  to  detect  characterized failure  to  and  replicate  King  &  Heller,  be  1984)  create  statistical  a  literature  findings.  would  (e.g., not  Furthermore, Joffe  be  &  be e s s e n t i a l u n t i l  as  of  sensitive  measures  social  Dobson,  surprising.  s h o r t , l a r g e r sample s i z e s may more  rather  expect t h a t s t u d i e s with  would  studies  current  may  c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y modest  such  small  striking  our  interaction  inconsistent  showed  the  represented that  The  previous  content  Despite  suggesting social  1979).  reflect  their  videotapes  differences,  by  to  4).  I f such i s the case, we may  modest sample s i z e s ,  1987;  Table  the  qualitative  blunt.  Hokanson,  verifying  (see  differences,  &  designed  data  differences  Howes  In  such  time  interaction  are  developed. G e n e r a l l y speaking, experimental d e s i g n s are p r e f e r a b l e to  correlational  regarding  the  designs,  direction  1963).  The  present  designs  may  be  interpersonal to  be  Table  of  findings  particularly  rather  reveals that  are  causality  complementarity,  relative 6  s i n c e they  than  more i n f o r m a t i v e  (Campbell  suggest  that  important  in  &  Stanley,  experimental the  study  s i n c e complementarity absolute.  An  seems  examination  s u b j e c t s r a t e d themselves  of  of  highest i n  the f r i e n d l y - d o m i n a n t o c t a n t of the IAS  r e g a r d l e s s of group  membership,  people  themselves  and  one  i n such  would positive  expect social  most  terms.  The  to  describe  differences  80  in  complementarity p a t t e r n s  groups  comparisons  correlational  Mediating The  may  that  not  were e v i d e n t  have  been  from  between  apparent  in  design.  Variables present  study's  attempts  to  find  intrapersonal  v a r i a b l e s t h a t mediated t h e e f f e c t s o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l were  unsuccesful.  For  experimental  condition,  found  pretest  among  depressive  those no  subjects  exposed  was  t o the  significant relationships  measures  of depressive  Relationships  were  symptoms  and  among these v a r i a b l e s were  from Coyne's (1976b) model o f d e p r e s s i o n  Beck's (1967) c o g n i t i v e model o f d e p r e s s i o n (e.g.,  impact  c o g n i t i v e s t y l e and p o s t t e s t measures o f mood and  s o c i a l acceptance. predicted  a  Coyne & G o t l i b ,  predicted  that  and from  and i t s c r i t i c s  1983; Lewinsohn e t a l . , 1980). depressive  cognitive  style  It  would  c o r r e l a t e w i t h n e g a t i v e mood and t h a t p r i o r d e p r e s s i o n  would  correlate  mood.  with  both  social  acceptance  S i n c e t h e p r e d i c t i o n s were d e r i v e d negative  findings  do  not  p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r e t i c a l model.  have  and n e g a t i v e  from s e v e r a l sources, t h e implications  f o r any  Furthermore, t h e p o s s i b i l i t y  t h a t t h e f i n d i n g s may r e f l e c t i n s u f f i c i e n t s t a t i s t i c a l power to detect  differences  predictions half  cannot be e n t i r e l y r u l e d o u t .  were t e s t e d  o f t h e study's  using  sample,  a c o r r e l a t i o n a l design thus  much  lower  with  statistical  power would be expected f o r t e s t s o f these p r e d i c t i o n s was t h e case i n t h e r e s t o f t h e study.  These  than  N e v e r t h e l e s s , when  81  statistical  power  was  improved  by  reducing  the  mood  v a r i a b l e s t o a s i n g l e composite score, t h e s t a t i s t i c a l still  failed  research  may  adequately cannot and  t o r e j e c t the n u l l hypothesis. require  test  rule  withdrawal  experimental  designs  predictions,  the present  these  out t h e h y p o t h e s i s  symptoms  do  Although  not mediate  when someone  that  i s exposed  future  i n order  depressive  mood  tests  to  findings cognitions  induction  and  to the kind  social  of s o c i a l  response t h a t depressed behaviour e l i c i t s i n s t r a n g e r s .  Interpersonal The  Models o f Depression  present  findings  supported  the  underlying  assumption o f any i n t e r p e r s o n a l model o f d e p r e s s i o n ,  that i s  t h a t t h e response t h a t t h e depressed evoke i n o t h e r s  elicits  both  depressive  social  Interpersonal  circumplex  investigation  and  regarding based  depression (e.g., not  (1976b)  Coyne's  and  of  model,  & Gotlib,  out.  model  Other  predictions predictions  cognitive  models  of  o f c o g n i t i v e models  1983; Lewinsohn e t a l . , 1980) were  In s h o r t , were  mood.  enabled t h e  additional  complementarity.  (1976b)  negative  and theory  (Beck, 1967), and c r i t i c i s m s  Coyne  borne  measures  confirmation  interpersonal  upon  behaviour  not  predictions supported  specific  by  t o Coyne's  the f i n d i n g s .  The  evidence d i d support those p r e d i c t i o n s t h a t were a) common t o any i n t e r p e r s o n a l model o f d e p r e s s i o n , from  interpersonal  general  theory  circumplex  theory.  o f human behaviour,  and/or b) d e r i v e d  As a w e l l  interpersonal  developed circumplex  82  theory  has  lent  depression  both  in this  breadth  and p r e c i s i o n  established,  derived strong  from  a  number  Coyne's  empirical  found  t o be  o f such f i n d i n g s  of  other  (1976a,  support  between s t r a n g e r s . been  i n other  offer  depressed  versus  Robinson,  1982;  controversy people  induce  (Doerfler  &  1987; K i n g  not  Howes  of  negative  mood  1984).  out, such  depressed  1979),  and  or  1986;  interactions  adequately  test  who  not  &  depressed in  others  &  Dobson,  and C h a p l i n  (1985)  of strangers  model,  since  Thus,  intimates  interpersonal  do  i t is  intimates.  between  is  considerable  Joffe  i n studies (1976b)  others  (Gotlib  rejection  As D o e r f l e r  findings  and  whether  Gurtman,  n e g a t e Coyne's  social to  interactions  someone  a model o f i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n  essential  found  (Coyne, 1 9 7 6 a ) ,  to  i s not  regarding  & Heller,  of  not  the p r e d i c t i o n that  Hokanson,  1985;  essentially studies  &  arisen  necessarily  studies  support  who  Chaplin,  have p o i n t e d  have  as m a n i p u l a t i v e  more  someone  has  model  predictions  F o r example, d e p r e s s e d b e h a v i o u r h a s n o t perceived  initially  remains t o  specific  1976b)  e v i d e n c e has been mixed r e g a r d i n g would  of  instance.  Although the conclusiveness be  t o the study  are  models  of  depression. Studies investigate untested,  of other  may  interpersonal  including  interpersonal both  intimates  issues  control.  emphasized t h a t  be  predictions  related  Coyne  also  to  (1976b)  the capacity  required  that  guilt and  a r e as y e t  feelings  Salzman  of depressed  to  and  (1975)  individuals  83  t o induce  guilt  i n others  i s important  r e j e c t i o n o f t h e depressed. unlikely  with  with  models  of depression  control  studies  of  emphasize  1976b; Salzman, 1975).  strangers. may  be  Several  need t o be  interactional  of interpersonal  & Wortman,  1980;  P e r c e p t i o n s o f another's  interpersonal control  interactions  would  the r o l e  (Coates  between  may  intimates  be more  than  social  i n d u c t i o n would be  hypothesis  intimates.  and m a n i p u l a t i o n  exercise  Since g u i l t  strangers, t h i s  tested  i n mediating  Coyne,  attempts t o  pronounced i n  in  those  between  Thus, s t u d i e s o f i n t e r a c t i o n s between i n t i m a t e s  required  to  investigate predictions derived  from  s e v e r a l i n t e r a c t i o n a l models o f d e p r e s s i o n . This  study  shares  the l i m i t a t i o n s  analogue  research.  Although  such  internal  validity,  external  validity  (Campbell  &  necessary  Stanley,  1963).  of other  research may  enables be  Additional  t o determine whether t h e p r e s e n t  laboratory maximal  constrained evidence  is  f i n d i n g s can be  extended t o men, o p p o s i t e sex i n t e r a c t a n t s , i n t i m a t e s r a t h e r than  strangers,  conversations, depressed and  so  actual more  conversations  naturalistic  rather  than  settings,  staged  clinically  p a r t i c i p a n t s , nondepressed mental h e a l t h p a t i e n t s ,  on.  F o r example,  suggest  that  there  ability  t o process  1980).  Such d i f f e r e n c e s may a l s o have r e l e v a n c e f o r s o c i a l  interaction  and  there  a r e important social  stimuli  depression.  generalizability i s crucial:  i s research  evidence  to  sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n the (Wine,  The  Moses,  & Swine,  question  of  f i r m c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g the  84  role  of  i n t e r p e r s o n a l complementarity  be drawn u n t i l  i n depression  the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of the p r e s e n t  cannot  findings  i s e i t h e r e s t a b l i s h e d o r d i s c o n t i n u e d by f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . The  implications  understanding that  the  differences.  depressed  this  study's  o f d e p r e s s i o n are a l s o  videotaped  knowledge,  of  stimuli  Although  the  the  will  limited  videotapes of  need  the  t o be  for  t o the  represent actual  characteristics  behaviour  findings  extent  interactional  represent response  confirmed  current  evoked with  Had i t  i t would have been p r e f e r a b l e f o r t h i s  study  t o have used v i d e o t a p e s of a c t u a l c o n v e r s a t i o n s wherein t a r g e t s i n the experimental people who in  fact  attempted,  Recruitment  but  problems  conversations  from  was  the  prototypical  to  group  internal important external ascertain  data,  c o u l d be  was  made  validity. to  place  validity. the  generalized  to  In a  future greater  Since  extent other  of  the  interest  studies, emphasis  further  t o which the  The  of  upon  present and  r e s u l t s s h o u l d be i n t e r p r e t e d w i t h c a u t i o n .  that  decision according maximizing  i t will  research  circumstances  taped  conversations  i n s t r u c t e d t o respond in  was  abandoned.  number  would conform t o group data c o u l d be s e l e c t e d . t o use a c t o r s , who  with  Such a s t r a t e g y  eventually  restricted  which  the  c o n d i t i o n were i n t e r a c t i n g  were d i a g n o s a b l y depressed.  by  actual  c o n v e r s a t i o n s i n s t u d i e s w i t h adequate sample s i z e s . been f e a s i b l e ,  our  be  more  establishing  i s required findings  may  populations,  to be the  85  Although favour  one  others,  there  Relative  considerable  of social  experience  Costello,  1986; H o o l e y  are  (Weissman  &  responses Coyne, 1978;  et  1976a;  Paykel,  Gotlib  that  &  social  generalizability the p r o l i f e r a t i o n research sample  should  found social  e t a l . , 1983; Monroe family  environments  marital  interactions  affective  more  Boswell 1982;  friction  negative  social  &  1981;  Murray,  Hammen  & Hokanson,  study  tone  &  Peters,  1979; Howes  & Coyne,  provided  1983;  evidence  t h a t u n d e r l y any i n t e r p e r s o n a l  Further  research,  particularly  intimates, i s required t o establish the  of findings  t o date.  In order  of studies with inconsistent employ  sizes  whenever  investigation  of social  the quest  and  The p r e s e n t  depression.  research with  and fewer  interpersonal  Robinson,  supports t h e assumptions of  the  e t a l . , 1979; S t r a c k  e t a l . , 1981).  model  more  (e.g.,  indicating  i n depression.  negative  e t a l . , 1980; Howes  a l , 1985; R o b b i n s  Winer  1974),  strangers  Hokanson  more  to any  have been  events  and c r i t i c a l  by  date over  factors  the depressed  a l . , 1971),  from  evidence  social  to  depression  e t a l . , 1986),  characterized  (Hinchliffe  of  1982; F i o r e  a l . , 1 9 8 3 ) , more h o s t i l e  that  evidence  interactional  more s t r e s s f u l  (e.g.,  (Hooley,  et  is  model  t o t h e nondepressed,  supports et  i s insufficient  interpersonal  significance  to  there  experimental possible. interaction  f o r a more c o m p l e t e  designs In  any  t o prevent  results, with case,  such  adequate further  seems t o b e w a r r a n t e d i n  understanding  of depression.  86  References Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J . D. (1978). Learned h e l p l e s s n e s s i n humans: C r i t i q u e and r e f o r m u l a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 87, 49-74. American P s y c h i a t r i c A s s o c i a t i o n . (1987). D i a g n o s t i c and s t a t i s t i c a l manual o f mental d i s o r d e r s (3rd ed., R e v i s e d ) . Washington, DC: Author. Anchin, J . C , & K i e s l e r , D. J . (Eds.) (1982). Handbook of i n t e r p e r s o n a l psychotherapy. E l m s f o r d , NY: Pergamon. A r i e t i , S., & Bemporad, J . (1980). The p s y c h o l o g i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f d e p r e s s i o n . American J o u r n a l o f P s y c h i a t r y , 137. 1360-1365. Bandura, A. (1977). S o c i a l l e a r n i n g t h e o r y . C l i f f s , NJ: Prentice-Hall.  Englewood  Bandura, A. (1986). S o c i a l f o u n d a t i o n s o f thought and action: A s o c i a l c o g n i t i v e t h e o r y . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: Prentice-Hall. Beck, A.T. (1967). Depression: C l i n i c a l , e x p e r i m e n t a l , and t h e o r e t i c a l a s p e c t s . New York: Herber. Beck, A.T. (1974) The development o f d e p r e s s i o n : A c o g n i t i v e model. In R.J. Friedman & M.M. Katz (Eds.), The psychology o f d e p r e s s i o n : Contemporary t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h . Washington, DC: Winston. Beck, A.T., Rush, A.J., Shaw, B.F., Emery, G. (1979). C o g n i t i v e therapy o f d e p r e s s i o n . New York: G u i l f o r d . Beck, A.T., Ward, C.H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J . , & Erbaugh, J. (1961). Inventory f o r measuring d e p r e s s i o n . A r c h i v e s o f General P s y c h i a t r y . 4, 561-571. Beckham, E. E., & Leber, W. R. (1985). The comparative e f f i c a c y o f psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy f o r depression. In E. E. Beckham & W. R. Leber (Eds.), Handbook o f d e p r e s s i o n : Treatment, assessment, and r e s e a r c h . Homewood, 111.: Dorsey. B i l l i n g s , A. G., C r o n k i t e , R. C , & Moos, R. H. (1983). Social-environmental factors i n unipolar depression: Comparisons o f depressed p a t i e n t s and nondepressed controls. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology, 92, 119-133.  87  B i l l i n g s , A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1981). The r o l e of coping response and s o c i a l r e s o u r c e s i n a t t e n t u a t i n g the impact of s t r e s s f u l l i f e events. J o u r n a l of B e h a v i o r a l Medicine, 4, 139-157. B i l l i n g s , A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1982). P s y c h o s o c i a l theory and r e s e a r c h on d e p r e s s i o n : An i n t e g r a t i v e framework and review. C l i n i c a l Psychology Review, 2, 213-237. B i l l i n g s , A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1984). Coping, s t r e s s , and s o c i a l r e s o u r c e s among a d u l t s w i t h u n i p o l a r d e p r e s s i o n . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology. 46, 877-891. Blaney, P. H. (1977). Contemporary t h e o r i e s o f d e p r e s s i o n : C r i t i q u e and comparison. J o u r n a l of Abnormal Psychology, 86. 203-223. Blaney, P.H., Behar, V., & Head, R. (1980). Two measures of d e p r e s s i v e c o g n i t i o n s : T h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h d e p r e s s i o n and w i t h each o t h e r . J o u r n a l of Abnormal Psychology. 89, 679-682. Blumberg, S.R., & Hokanson, J.E. (1983). The e f f e c t s of another person's response s t y l e on i n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o r i n d e p r e s s i o n . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology, 92., 196-209. B o s w e l l , P. C , & Murray, E. J . (1981). Depression, s c h i z o p h r e n i a , and s o c i a l a t t r a c t i o n . Journal of C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology. 49, 641-647. Bothwell, S. & Weissman, M. M. (1977). S o c i a l impairments f o u r y e a r s a f t e r an acute d e p r e s s i v e episode. American J o u r n a l of O r t h o p s y c h i a t r y . 231-237. Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. P s y c h o l o g i s t . 36, 129-148. Bowlby, J . (1969). Attachment and l o s s . Attachment. London: Hogarth.  American V o l . I:  Brown, G. W., & H a r r i s , T. O. (1978). S o c i a l o r i g i n s of d e p r e s s i o n : A study o f p s y c h i a t r i c d i s o r d e r i n women. New York: Free P r e s s . Bumberry, W., O l i v e r , J . M., & McClure, J . M. (1978). V a l i d a t i o n of the Beck Depression Inventory i n a u n i v e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n u s i n g p s y c h i a t r i c e s t i m a t e as the criterion. J o u r n a l of C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology. 46. 150-155.  88  Burgess, E. P. (1969). The m o d i f i c a t i o n o f d e p r e s s i v e behaviors. In R. D. Rubin & C. M. Franks (Eds.), Advances i n b e h a v i o r therapy. New York: Academic Press. Campbell, D. T., & S t a n l e y , J . C. (1963). Experimental and q u a s i - e x p e r i m e n t a l d e s i g n s f o r r e s e a r c h . Boston: Houghton-Mi f f 1 i n . Carson, R.C. (1969). I n t e r a c t i o n concepts o f p e r s o n a l i t y . Chicago, ILL: A l d i n e . Carson, R. C. (1979). P e r s o n a l i t y and exchange i n developing r e l a t i o n s h i p s . In R. L. Burgess & T. L. Huston (Eds.), S o c i a l exchange i n d e v e l o p i n g relationships. New York: Academic P r e s s . Coates, D., & Wortman, C. (1980). Depression maintenance and i n t e r p e r s o n a l c o n t r o l . In A. Baura & J . S i n g e r (Eds.), Advances i n environmental psychology ( V o l . 2 ) . H i l l s d a l e , N.J.: Erlbaum. Cohen, M. B., Baker, G., Cohen, R. A., Fromm-Reichmann, F. & Weigert, E. A. (1954). An i n t e n s i v e study o f twelve cases o f manic-depressive psychoses. P s y c h i a t r y , 17, 103-117. Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents o f s e l f - e s t e e m . San F r a n c i s c o : W. H. Freeman. C o s t e l l o , C. G. (1972). Depression: Loss o f r e i n f o r c e r s or l o s s of r e i n f o r c e r e f f e c t i v e n e s s ? Behavior Therapy, 3, 240-247. C o s t e l l o , C. G. (1978). A c r i t i c a l review o f Seligman's l a b o r a t o r y experiments on l e a r n e d h e l p l e s s n e s s and d e p r e s s i o n i n humans. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology, 87, 21-31. C o s t e l l o , C. G. (1982). S o c i a l f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d e p r e s s i o n : A r e t r o s p e c t i v e community study. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Medicine. 12, 329-339. Coyne, J.C. others.  (1976a). Depression and the response o f J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 85, 186-193.  Coyne, J.C. (1976b). Toward an i n t e r a c t i o n a l o f d e p r e s s i o n . P s y c h i a t r y . 39, 28-40.  description  Coyne, J . C , (1982). A c r i t i q u e o f c o g n i t i o n s as c a u s a l e n t i t i e s with p a r t i c u l a r reference to depression. C o g n i t i v e Therapy and Research, 6, 3-13.  89  Coyne, J . C. (1985). Comment: Studying depressed persons' i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h s t r a n g e r s and spouses. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 94. 231-232. Coyne, J . C , Aldwin, C. , & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Depression and c o p i n g i n s t r e s s f u l e p i s o d e s . J o u r n a l of Abnormal Psychology. 90, 439-447. Coyne, J . C , & G o t l i b , I.H. (1983). The r o l e o f c o g n i t i o n i n depression: A c r i t i c a l appraisal. Psychology B u l l e t i n . 94, 472-505. Derry, P., & Kuiper, N. (1981). Schematic p r o c e s s i n g and s e l f reference i n c l i n i c a l depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 90. 286-297. Dobson, K. S. (1987). M a r i t a l and s o c i a l adjustment i n depressed and r e m a r r i e d women. J o u r n a l o f C l i n i c a l Psychology. 43. 261-265. Dobson, K. S. (1987, June). C o g n i t i v e a p p r a i s a l o f s o c i a l impact and r e j e c t i o n by anxious and depressed t a r g e t s . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e annual meeting o f t h e Canadian P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , Vancouver, B.C. Dobson, K.S., & B r e i t e r , H.J. (1983). C o g n i t i v e assessment o f d e p r e s s i o n : R e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y o f t h r e e e measures. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 92., 107-109. Dobson, K. S., & Shaw, B. F. (1986). w i t h major d e p r e s s i v e d i s o r d e r s . Research. 10. 13-29.  C o g n i t i v e assessment C o g n i t i v e Therapy and  D o e r f l e r , L. A., & C h a p l i n , W. F. (1985). Type I I I e r r o r i n r e s e a r c h on i n t e r p e r s o n a l medels o f d e p r e s s i o n . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 94, 227-230. Eastman, C. (1976). B e h a v i o r a l f o r m u l a t i o n s o f d e p r e s s i o n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review. 83. 277-291. F e r s t e r , C. B. (1974). B e h a v i o r a l approaches t o depression. In R. J . Friedman & M. M. Katz (Eds.), The psychology o f d e p r e s s i o n : Contemporary t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h . New York: Wiley. F i o r e , J . , Becker, J . , & Coppel, D. B. (1983). Social network i n t e r a c t i o n s : A b u f f e r o r a s t r e s s . American J o u r n a l o f Community Psychology, 11, 423-439. Foa, U.G. (1961). Convergences i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e s t r u c t u r e of interpersonal behavior. Psychological Review. 68, 341-353.  90  Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. d e p r e s s i v e symptomology. Psychology. 95, 107-113.  (1986). S t r e s s p r o c e s s e s and J o u r n a l o f Abnormal  F o r r e s t , M. S., & Hokanson, J . E. (1975). Depression snd autonomic a r o u s a l r e d u c t i o n accompanying s e l f - p u n i t i v e b e h a v i o r . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 84, 346-357. Franche, R. (1987, June). The i n t e r p e r s o n a l response t o d e p r e s s i o n as a f u n c t i o n o f v a r y i n g degrees o f intimacy. Paper p r e s e n t e d a t the annual meeting o f the Canadian P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , Vancouver, B.C. Friedman, R. J . , & Katz, M. M. (Eds.). (1974). The psychology o f d e p r e s s i o n : Contemporary t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h . New York: Wiley. G o l i n , S., Sweeney, P. D., & S h a e f f e r , D. E. (1981). The c a u s a l i t y of causal a t t r i b u t i o n s i n depression: A c r o s s - l a g g e d panel c o r r e l a t i o n a l a n a l y s i s . J o u r n a l of Abnormal Psychology. 90. 14-22. G o t l i b , I . H., & Asarnow, R. F. (1979). I n t e r p e r s o n a l and impersonal p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g s k i l l s i n m i l d l y and c l i n i c a l l y depressed u n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s . J o u r n a l of C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology. 47, 86-95. G o t l i b , I . H., & Beatty, M. E. (1985). Negative responses t o d e p r e s s i o n : The r o l e o f a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e . C o g n i t i v e Therapy and Research. 9, 91-103. G o t l i b , I.H., & Robinson, L.A. (1982). Responses t o depressed i n d i v i d u a l s : D i s c r e p e n c i e s between s e l f - r e p o r t and o b s e r v e r - r a t e d b e h a v i o r . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 91, 231-240. Gottman, J . M. Wiley.  (1979).  Marital interaction.  New  York:  G r i n k e r , R. R. (1964). R e c e p t i o n o f communications by p a t i e n t s i n d e p r e s s i v e s t a t e s . A r c h i v e s o f General P s y c h i a t r y . 10. 576-580. Gurtman, M. B. (1986). Depression and the response o f o t h e r s : R e e v a l u a t i n g the r e e v a l u a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 95. 99-101. Haas, G. L., C l a r k i n , J . F., & G l i c k , I . D. (1985). M a r i t a l and f a m i l y treatment o f d e p r e s s i o n . In E. E. Beckham & W. R. Leber (Eds.), Handbook o f d e p r e s s i o n : Treatment, assessment, and r e s e a r c h . Homewood, 111.: Dorsey.  91  Hafner, R. J . (1986). Marriage and mental i l l n e s s : roles perspective. New York: Guilford.  A sex  Haley, J . (1976). P r o b l e m - s o l v i n g therapy: New s t r a t e g i e s f o r e f f e c t i v e f a m i l y therapy. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Hamilton, E.W., & Abramson, L.Y. (1983). Cognitive p a t t e r n s and major d e p r e s s i v e d i s o r d e r : A l o n g i t u d i n a l study i n a h o s p i t a l s e t t i n g . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 92, 183-194. Hammen, C., Marks, T., Mayol, A., & deMayo, R. (1985). D e p r e s s i v e self-schemas, l i f e s t r e s s , and v u l n e r a b i l i t y t o d e p r e s s i o n . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 94, 308-319. Hammen, C., Mayol, A., deMayo, R., & Marks, T. (1986). I n i t i a l symptom l e v e l s and t h e l i f e - e v e n t - d e p r e s s i o n relationship. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 95, 114-122. Hammen, C.L., & P e t e r s , S.D. (1977). Differential responses t o male and female d e p r e s s i v e r e a c t i o n s . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology. 45, 994-1001. Hammen, C.L., & P e t e r s , S.D. (1978). Interpersonal consequences o f d e p r e s s i o n : Responses t o men and women e n a c t i n g a depressed r o l e . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 87, 322-331. H i n c h l i f f e , M. K., Hooper, D., & Roberts, F. J . (1978). The melancholy marriage: Depression i n marriage and p s y c h o s o c i a l approaches t o therapy. New York: Wiley. H i n c h l i f f e , M. K., L a n c a s h i r e , M., & Roberts, F. J . (1971). Depression: Defense mechanisms i n speech. British J o u r n a l o f P s y c h i a t r y . 118. 471-472.  <  Hoberman, H. M., & Lewinsohn, P. M. (1985). The b e h a v i o r a l treatment o f d e p r e s s i o n . I n E. E. Beckham & W. R. Leber (Eds.), Handbook o f d e p r e s s i o n : Treatment. assessment, and r e s e a r c h . Homewood, 111.: Dorsey. Hoehn-Hyde, D., Schlottmann, R. S., & Rush, A. J . (1982). P e r c e p t i o n o f s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s i n depressed p s y c h i a t r i c p a t i e n t s . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 53. 209-212. Hokanson, J . E., Sacco, W. P., Blumberg, S. R. & Landrum, G. C. (1980). I n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o r o f d e p r e s s i v e i n d i v i d u a l s i n a mixed-motive game. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 89, 320-332.  92  Hooley, J . M. (1986). Expressed emotion and d e p r e s s i o n : I n t e r a c t i o n s between p a t i e n t s and h i g h - v e r s u s low-expressed-emotion spouses. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology, 95, 237-246. Hooley, J . M., O r l e y , J . , & Teasdale, J . D. (1986). L e v e l s o f expressed emotion and r e l a p s e i n depressed p a t i e n t s . B r i t i s h J o u r n a l o f P s y c h i a t r y . 148. 642-647. Howes, M.J., & Hokanson, J . E . (1979). C o n v e r s a t i o n a l and s o c i a l responses t o d e p r e s s i v e i n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o r . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 88. 625-634. Howes, M. J . , Hokanson, J . E., & Loewenstein, D. A. (1985). I n d u c t i o n o f d e p r e s s i v e a f f e c t a f t e r prolonged exposure t o a m i l d l y depressed i n d i v i d u a l . Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology. 49, 110-113. Jacobson, N. S., & Anderson, E. A. (1982). Interpersonal s k i l l and d e p r e s s i o n i n c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s : An a n a l y s i s of the timing of s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e s . Behavior Therapy. 13, 271-282. J o f f e , R. D., & Dobson, K. S. (1987). Interpersonal responses t o depressed and nondepressed t a r g e t s : An important f a i l u r e t o r e p l i c a t e . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. Jones, E. E., & N i s b e t t , R. E. (1971). The a c t o r and t h e o b s e r v e r : D i v e r g e n t p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e causes o f b e h a v i o r . New York: General L e a r n i n g C o r p o r a t i o n . K e l l e r , K.E. (1983). D y s f u n c t i o n a l a t t i t u d e s and t h e c o g n i t i v e therapy f o r d e p r e s s i o n . C o g n i t i v e Therapy and Research. 7, 437-444. K i e s l e r , D.J. (1982). I n t e r p e r s o n a l t h e o r y f o r p e r s o n a l i t y and psychotherapy. In J.C. Anchin & D.J. K i e s l e r (Eds.), Handbook o f i n t e p e r s o n a l psychotherapy. E l m s f o r d , NY: Pergamon. K i e s l e r , D.J. (1983). The 1982 I n t e r p e r s o n a l C i r c l e : A taxonomy f o r complementarity i n human t r a n s a c t i o n s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 90, 185-214. K i e s l e r , D.J., Anchin, J . C , P e r k i n s , M.J., Chirico,B.M., K y l e , E.M., & Federman, E . J . , (1975, 1976). The Impact Message Inventory. Richmond: V i r g i n i a Commonwealth U n i v e r s i t y . King, D. A., & H e l l e r , K. (1984). Depression and t h e response o f o t h e r s : A r e - e v a l u a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology, 93. 477-480.  93  K i r k , R. E. (1982). Experimental d e s i g n : Procedures f o r the b e h a v i o r a l s c i e n c e s . Belmont, Ca.: Brooks/Cole. K r a n t z , S., & Hammen, C.L., (1979). Assessment o f c o g n i t i v e b i a s i n d e p r e s s i o n . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology, 88/ 611-619. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The s t r u c t u r e o f s c i e n t i f i c r e v o l u t i o n s (2nd e d . ) . Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago Press. Leary, T. (1957). I n t e r p e r s o n a l d i a g n o s i s o f p e r s o n a l i t y . New York: Ronald P r e s s . L e r n e r , M. J . (1970). The d e s i r e f o r j u s t i c e and r e a c t i o n s to victims. In J . Macaulay & L. Berkowitz (Eds.), A l t r u s i m and h e l p i n g b e h a v i o r . New York: Academic Press. Levenson, R. W., & Gottman, J . M. (1983). Marital interaction: P h y s i o l o g i c a l l i n k a g e and a f f e c t i v e exchange. J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology. 45, 587-597. Lewinsohn, P. M. (1974). A b e h a v i o r a l approach t o depression. I n R. J . Friedman & M. M. Katz (Eds.). The psychology o f d e p r e s s i o n : Contemporary t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h . New York: Wiley. Lewinsohn, P. M. (1975). The b e h a v i o r a l study and treatment o f d e p r e s s i o n . I n M. Hersen, P. M. M i l l e r , & R. M. E i s l e r (Eds.), Progress i n b e h a v i o r m o d i f i c a t i o n ( V o l . 1 ) . New York: Academic P r e s s . Lewinsohn, P. M., L o b i t z , C., & Wilson, S. (1973). " S e n s i t i v i t y " o f depressed i n d i v i d u a l s t o a v e r s i v e stimuli. J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 81, 259-263. Lewinsohn, P.M., M i s c h e l , W., C h a p l i n , W., & Barton,R. (1980). S o c i a l competence and d e p r e s s i o n : The r o l e o f i l l u s o r y s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n s . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology, 89, 203-212. Lewinsohn, P. M., W e i n s t e i n , M. S., & Shaw, D. A. (1969). In R. D. Rubin & C. M. Franks (Eds.), Advances i n b e h a v i o r therapy. New York: Academic P r e s s . Manly, P. C , McMahon, R. J . , Bradley, C. F., & Davidson, P. O. (1982). D e p r e s s i v e a t t r i b u t i o n a l s t y l e and depression following c h i l d b i r t h . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 91. 245-254. Marks, T., & Hammen, C. L. (1982). I n t e r p e r s o n a l mood induction: S i t u a t i o n a l and i n d i v i d u a l determinants. M o t i v a t i o n and Emotion. 6, 387-399.  94  McLean, P. D. (1976a). Depression as a s p e c i f i c response to stress. In I . G. Sarason & C. D. S p e i l b e r g e r (Eds.), S t r e s s and a n x i e t y ( V o l . 3 ) . Washington, DC: Hemisphere. McLean, P. D. (1976b). T h e r a p e u t i c decision-making i n the b e h a v i o r a l treatment o f d e p r e s s i o n . In P. 0. Davidson (Ed.), The b e h a v i o u r a l management o f a n x i e t y , d e p r e s s i o n , and p a i n . New York: Brunner/Mazel. McLean, P. D., & H a k s t i a n , A. R. (1979). Clinical d e p r e s s i o n : Comparative e f f i c a c y o f o u t p a t i e n t treatments. J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l Psychology. 47, 818-836. McLean, P. D., Ogston, K., & Grauer, L. (1973). A b e h a v i o u r a l approach t o the treatment o f d e p r e s s i o n . J o u r n a l o f Behavior Therapy and Experimental P s y c h i a t r y . 4, 323-330. Mehrabian, A., & R u s s e l l , J.A. environmental psychology.  (1974). An approach t o Cambridge, MA: MIT P r e s s .  Meyer, B. E. B., & Hokanson, J . E. (1985). Situational i n f l u e n c e s on s o c i a l b e h a v i o r s o f depression-prone individuals. J o u r n a l o f C l i n i c a l Psychology. 41, 29-35. M i l l e r , D. T., & M o r e t t i , M. M. (in press). The c a u s a l a t t r i b u t i o n s of depressives: S e l f - s e r v i n g or self-disserving? In L. A l l o y (Ed.), C o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s i n d e p r e s s i o n . New York: Guilford. Monroe, S., Imhoss, D., Wise, B. & H a r r i s , J . (1983). P r e d i c t i o n o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l symptoms under h i g h - r i s k p s y c h o s o c i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s : L i f e events, s o c i a l support, and symptom s p e c i f i c i t y . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 92, 338-350. Orford, J . (1986). The r u l e s o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l complementarity: Does h o s t i l i t y beget h o s t i l i t y and dominance, submission? P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review. 93, 365-377. P a y k e l , E. S., & Weissman, M. M. (1973). S o c i a l adjustment and d e p r e s s i o n : A l o n g i t u d i n a l study. A r c h i v e s o f General P s y c h i a t r y . 28, 659-663. P a y k e l , E. S., Weissman, M. M., P r u s o f f , B. A.,fieTonks, CM. (1971). Dimensions o f s o c i a l adjustment i n depressed women. J o u r n a l o f Nervous and Mental Disease, 152, 158-172. Pepper, S. C. evidence .  (1942). World hypotheses: A study i n Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press.  95  P e r k i n s , M.J., K i e s l e r , D.J., Anchin, J . C , C h i r i c o , B.M., K y l e , E.M., & Federman, E . J . (1979). The Impact Message Inventory: A new meausre o f r e l a t i o n s h i p i n counseling/psychotherapy and o t h e r dyads. J o u r n a l of C o u n s e l i n g Psychology. 26. 363-367. Rehm, L.P. (1976). Assessment o f d e p r e s s i o n . In M. Hersen & A.S. B e l l a c k (Eds.), B e h a v i o r a l assessment: A p r a c t i c a l handbook. Oxford: Pergamon P r e s s . Robbins, B. P., S t r a c k , S., & Coyne, J . C. (1979). W i l l i n g n e s s t o p r o v i d e feedback t o depressed persons. S o c i a l Behavior and P e r s o n a l i t y . 7, 199-203. Rush, A. J . , Beck, A. T., Kovacs, M. & H o l l o n , S. (1977). Comparative e f f i c a c y o f c o g n i t i v e therapy and imipramine i n the treatment o f depressed o u t p a t i e n t s . C o g n i t i v e Therapy and Research. 1, 17-37. R u s s e l l , J . , & Mehrabian, A. (1977). A t h r e e f a c t o r t h e o r y o f emotion. J o u r n a l o f Research i n P e r s o n a l i t y . 11, 273-294. R u s s e l l , J.A., Ward, L.M., & P r a t t , G. (1981). Affective q u a l i t y a t t r i b u t e d t o environments: A factor analytic study. Emotion and Behavior. 13, 259-288. Sacco, W. P., & Hokanson, J . E. (1978). E x p e c t a t i o n s o f success and anagram performance o f d e p r e s s i v e s i n a p u b l i c and p r i v a t e s e t t i n g . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 87, 122-131. Salzman, L. (1975). I n t e r p e r s o n a l f a c t o r s i n d e p r e s s i o n . In F. F. F l a c h & S. C. Draghi (Eds.), The nature and treatment o f d e p r e s s i o n . New York: Wiley. Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). H e l p l e s s n e s s : On d e p r e s s i o n , development, and death. San F r a n c i s c o : W. H. Freeman. Skinner, B. F. (1971). York: Knopf.  Beyond freedom and d i g n i t y .  New  Skinner, B. F. (1987). Whatever happened t o psychology as the s c i e n c e o f behaviour? American P s y c h o l o g i s t . 42, 780-786. S t r a c k , S., & Coyne, J . C. (1983). S o c i a l c o n f i r m a t i o n o f dysphoria: Shared and p r i v a t e r e a c t i o n s t o d e p r e s s i o n . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology. 44, 798-806. Suarez, Y., Crowe, M. J . , & Adams, H. E. (1978). Depression: Avoidance l e a r n i n g and p h y s i o l o g i c a l c o r r e l a t e s i n c l i n i c a l and analog p o p u l a t i o n s . Behavior Research and Therapy. 16. 21-31.  96  S u l l i v a n , H. S. (1947). Conceptions o f modern p s y c h i a t r y . Washington, DC: W i l l i a m A. White P s y c h i a t r i c Foundation. S u t h e r l a n d , G., Newman, B., & Rachman, S. (1982). Experimental i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f t h e r e l a t i o n s between mood and i n t r u s i v e unwanted c o g n i t i o n s . British J o u r n a l o f M e d i c a l Psychology. 55, 127-138. Vaughn, C. E., & L e f f , J . P. (1976). The i n f l u e n c e o f f a m i l y and s o c i a l f a c t o r s on t h e course o f p s y c h i a t r i c illness: A comparison o f s c h i z o p h r e n i c and depressed neurotic patients. B r i t i s h J o u r n a l o f P s y c h i a t r y . 129, 125-137. Weissman, A. N., & Beck, A. T. (1978). Development and v a l i d a t i o n of Dysfunctional Attitude Scale: A preliminary investigation. Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e annual meeting o f t h e American E d u c a t i o n a l Research A s s o c i a t i o n , Toronto, O n t a r i o . Weissman, M. M., & Paykel, E. S. (1974). The depressed woman: A study o f s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago P r e s s . Weissman, M. M., P a y k e l , E. S., S i e g e l , R., & Klerman, G. L. (1971). The s o c i a l r o l e performance o f depressed women: A comparison w i t h a normal sample. American J o u r n a l o f O r t h o p s y c h i a t r y . 41. 390-405. Wessman, A.E., & R i c k s , D.F. (1966). Mood and p e r s o n a l i t y . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t & Winston. Wiggins, J.S. (1979). A p s y c h o l o g i c a l taxonomy o f t r a i t - d e s c r i p t i v e terms: The i n t e r p e r s o n a l domain. J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology. 37. 395-412. Wiggins, J . S. (1980). Circumplex models o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l behavior. I n L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review o f p e r s o n a l i t y and s o c i a l psychology ( V o l . 1 ) . B e v e r l y H i l l s : Sage. Wiggins, J.S. (1982). Circumplex models o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o r i n c l i n i c a l psychology. I n P.C. K e n d a l l & J.N. Butcher (Eds.), Handbook o f r e s e a r c h methods i n c l i n i c a l psychology. New York: Wiley. Wine, J . D., Moses, B., & Smye, M. D. Female s u p e r i o r i t y i n sex d i f f e r e n c e competence comparisons: A review o f t h e literature. In C. Stark-Adamec (Ed.), Sex r o l e s : O r i g i n s , i n f l u e n c e s , and i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r women. M o n t r e a l : Eden Press Women's P u b l i c a t i o n s .  97  Winer, D.L., Bonner, T.O., J r . , Blaney, P.H., & Murray, E . J . (1981). Depression and s o c i a l a t t r a c t i o n . M o t i v a t i o n and Emotion. 5, 153-166. Wing, J . K., & Bebbington, P. (1985). Epidemiology o f depression. In E. E. Beckham & W. R. Leber (Eds.), Handbook o f d e p r e s s i o n : Treatment, assessment, and r e s e a r c h . Homewood, 111.: Dorsey. Wrightsman, L. S., J r . , O'Connor, J . , & Baker, N. J . (Eds.) (1972). Cooperation and c o m p e t i t i o n : Readings i n mixed-motive games. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Youngren, M.A., & Lewinsohn, P.M. (1980). The f u n c t i o n a l r e l a t i o n between d e p r e s s i o n and p r o b l e m a t i c i n t e r p e r s o n a l b e h a v i o r . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal Psychology. 89, 333-341. Zemore, R., & D e l l , L. W. (1983). Interpersonal p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g s k i l l s and d e p r e s s i o n proneness. P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology B u l l e t i n . 9, 231-235. Zuckerman, M., & Lubin, B. (1965). Manual f o r the M u l t i p l e A f f e c t A d j e c t i v e Check L i s t . San Diego, CA: E d u c a t i o n a l and I n d u s t r i a l T e s t i n g S e r v i c e . Zuckerman, M., Persky, S., & C u r t i s , G. C. (1968). R e l a t i o n s h i p s among a n x i e t y , d e p r e s s i o n , h o s t i l i t y , and autonomic v a r i a b l e s . J o u r n a l o f Nervous and Mental Disease. 146. 481-487.  98 Appendix Contents  Page  Consent Form  99  Instructions  100  Questionnaires:  Set One  101  Wessman-Ricks E l a t i o n - D e p r e s s i o n S c a l e Mehrabian-Russell  Mood S c a l e  (M-R)  M u l t i p l e A f f e c t A d j e c t i v e Check L i s t Beck Depression  Inventory  (BDI)  Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale Videotape  (DAS)  Instructions  Questionnaires:  Set Two  (W-R) 102 103  (MAACL) 104 105 107 112 113  Instructions  114  W-R  115  M-R  116  MAACL  117  S o c i a l Acceptance Opinion S c a l e  118  Impact Message Inventory  120  Interpersonal Adjective Scales  124  99 CONSENT FORM SOCIAL INTERACTION STUDY K e i t h S. Dobson, Ph.D.  P a t r i c i a C. Manly,  T h i s i s a study about i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n . people respond to s t r a n g e r s that they are meeting will first  be asked t o f i l l  own thoughts and f e e l i n g s .  M.A.  We are i n t e r e s t e d i n how  f o r the f i r s t  time.  You  out a short s e r i e s of q u e s t i o n n a i r e s about You w i l l  your  then be asked to view a 15-minute  videotape of a c o n v e r s a t i o n and to imagine y o u r s e l f t a l k i n g with the person whose face you see on the s c r e e n .  F i n a l l y , you w i l l  be asked to complete a  second s e r i e s of q u e s t i o n n a i r e s d e s c r i b i n g your f e e l i n g s and impressions. experimenter w i l l  The  then e x p l a i n the purpose of the study i n d e t a i l and w i l l  answer any q u e s t i o n s .  The e n t i r e study w i l l  take approximately  minutes.  Your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s study i s e n t i r e l y v o l u n t a r y and you are f r e e to withdraw a t any time you wish without p r e j u d i c e . provide w i l l be kept s t r i c t l y c o n f i d e n t i a l .  A l l i n f o r m a t i o n that you  Your responses w i l l be i d e n t i f i e d  by a coded number o n l y , and when the r e s u l t s of the study are r e p o r t e d , only group data w i l l be presented. You w i l l be paid $2.00 f o r your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s  project.  "I hereby g i v e my consent t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s study under the c o n d i t i o n s as s t a t e d above.  Name  Date  I have r e t a i n e d a copy o f t h i s  statement."  Researcher  100 INSTRUCTIONS  T h i s i s a study about the acquaintance p r o c e s s .  A f t e r completing some  p r e l i m i n a r y q u e s t i o n n a i r e s about your own thoughts and f e e l i n g s , you w i l l see a 15-minute videotaped c o n v e r s a t i o n . The p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the c o n v e r s a t i o n are v o l u n t e e r s who agreed t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s study.  They were asked to t a l k  about themselves and were t o l d that they could d i s c u s s anything they chose, but to avoid using one another's names f o r the sake of c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y .  Since  we a r e only i n t e r e s t e d i n our s u b j e c t s ' impressions of one person a t a time, you w i l l only see one person's face on the v i d e o s c r e e n , and the v o i c e of the off-camera p a r t i c i p a n t has been masked. As you see the videotape, imagine that you a r e t a l k i n g with the person whose face you see on the screen. you are meeting her. the of  T r y to a l l o w y o u r s e l f t o r e a c t as though  t h i s person f o r the f i r s t  time and beginning to get to know  Be aware o f how you are f e e l i n g i n s i d e and how you a r e f e e l i n g person you see as the c o n v e r s a t i o n p r o g r e s s e s .  toward  T r y to form an impression  her and t h i n k about what i t i s l i k e to be with h e r . When the videotape i s over, complete  the second s e t of q u e s t i o n n a i r e s .  As  you continue to imagine being with the person you have j u s t seen, we w i l l be asking about your response to her. impressions of her?  What i s your mood?  How do you f e e l towards her?  What are your  What i s she l i k e ?  Please  g i v e your honest f e e l i n g s , o p i n i o n s , and r e a c t i o n s , remembering that a l l your responses a r e s t r i c t l y If  confidential.  you have any questions about the procedure a t t h i s time, please ask the  experimenter.  Otherwise, you may begin with the f i r s t  s e t of q u e s t i o n n a i r e s .  101  QUESTIONNAIRES:  SET ONE  T h i s packet o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l some o f your thoughts and f e e l i n g s . will  be asked  about  how  you f e e l  moment, and i n o t h e r s you w i l l feel  more  generally.  read  the i n s t r u c t i o n s  In some cases you right  be asked  F o r each carefully.  ask you about  now,  at this  about how you  questionnaire, Remember  responses w i l l be completely c o n f i d e n t i a l .  please  that  your  102  From the ten statements l i s t e d below, please c i r c l e the number of the one that best d e s c r i b e s how e l a t e d or depressed, now,  right  at t h i s moment.  1 0 . Complete e l a t i o n . 9.  happy or unhappy you f e e l  Rapturous joy and s o a r i n g e c s t a s y .  Very e l a t e d and i n very high s p i r i t s .  8. E l a t e d and i n high  Tremendous d e l i g h t and bouyancy.  spirits.  7. F e e l i n g very good and c h e e r f u l . 6. F e e l i n g p r e e t y good, 5. F e e l i n g a l i t t l e 4.  "OK".  b i t low.  Just  so-so.  S p i r i t s low and somewhat "blue".  3. Depressed and f e e l i n g very low. 2. Temendously depressed.  Definitely  "blue".  F e e l i n g t e r r i b l e , miserable  1. U t t e r d e p r e s s i o n and gloom.  Completely  down.  "just  awful."  A l l i s black and  leaden.  103 How do you f e e l r i g h t now? dimension.  Some of the p a i r s may seen unusual, but you probably f e e l more one  way than the other. ;-x—;  Each p a i r o f words below d e s c r i b e s a f e e l i n g  Please put one check somewhere along each l i n e  ) to show how you f e e l r i g h t now.  at an a c c u r a t e d e s c r i p t i o n of your  (Example:  Please take your time to a r r i v e  feelings.  Happy  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Unhappy  Stimulated  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Relaxed  Controlling  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Controlled  Annoyed  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Pleased  Calm  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Excited  Influenced  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Influential  Satisfied  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Dissatisfied  Frenzied  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Sluggish  In C o n t r o l  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Cared f o r  Melancholic  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Contented  Dull  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Jittery  Awed  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Important  Hopeful  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Despairing  Wide Awake  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Sleepy  Dominant  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Submissive  Bored  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Relaxed  Unaroused  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  Aroused  Guided  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  :  ;  ;  Autonomous  104 On this sheet you w i l l find words which describe different moods and feelings. C i r c l e the number of a l l which describe how you f e e l right now, at this moment.  1  active  34  devoted  67  interested  100  satisfied  2  adventurous  35  disagreeable  68  irritated  101  secure  3" affectionate  36  discontented  69  jealous  102  shaky  4  afraid  37  discouraged  70  joyful  103  shy  5  agitated  38  disgusted  71  kindly  104  soothed  6  agreeable  39  displeased  72  lonely  105  steady  7  aggressive  40  energetic  73  lost  106  stubborn  8  alive  41  enraged  74  loving  107  stormy  9  alone  42  enthusiastic  75  low  108  strong  amiable  43  fearful  76  lucky  109  suffering sullen  10 11  amused  44  fine  77  mad  110  12  angry  45  fit  78  mean  111  sun  13  annoyed  46  forlorn  79  meek  112  sympathetic  14  awful  47  frank  80  merry  113  tame tender  15  bashful  48  free  81  mild  114  16  bitter  49  friendly  82  miserable  115  tense  17  blue  50  frightened  83  nervous  116  terrible  18  bored  51  furious  84  obliging  117  terrified  19  calm  52  gay  84  offended  118  thoughtful.  20  cautious  53  gentle  86  outraged  119  timid  21  cheerful  54  glad  87  panicky  120  tormented  22  clean  55  gloomy  88  patient  121  understanding  23  complaining  56  good  89  predicted  122  unhappy  24  contented  57  good natured  90  pleased  123  unsociable  25  contrary  58  grim  91  pleasant  124  upset  26  cool  59  happy  92  polite  125  vexed warm  27  cooperative  60  healthy  93  power ful  126  28  critical  61  hopeless  94  quiet  127  whole  29  cross  62  hostile  95  reckless  128  wild  30  cruel  63  impatient  96  rejected  129  willful  31  daring  64  incensed  97  rough  130  wilted  32  desperate  65  indignant  98  sad  131  worrying  33  destroyed  66  inspired  99  safe  131  young  105 Beck Inventory On this questionnaire are groups of statements. Please read each group of statements c a r e f u l l y . Then pick out the one statement in each group which best describes the way you have been feeling the PAST WEEK, INCLUDING TODAY: C i r c l e the number beside the statement you picked. If several statements in the group seem to apply equally well, c i r c l e each one. Be sure to read a l l the statements in each group before making your choice. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  2.  0 1 2 3  I I I I  3.  0 1 2 3  I do not f e e l l i k e a f a i l u r e . I As I  4.  0 1 2 3  I I I I  5.  0 1 2 3  I I I I  6.  0 1 2 3  I ! I f e e l I may be punished. I i I  7.  0 1 2 3  I I I I  . (  8.  0 1 2 3  I I I I  ( ; ' blame myself for everything bad that happens.  9.  0 •I i 1 I 1 2 I ' 3 I '  1.  10. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  do not f e e l sad. feel sad. am sad a l l the time and I can't snap out of i t . am so sad or unhappy that I can't stand i t .  > f e e l guilty a good part of the time, f e e l quite guilty most of the time, f e e l guilty a l l of the time.  i  1hate myself.  . . ( i  I had the chance.  '  106 11. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  am no more i r r i t a t e d now than I ever am. get annoyed or i r r i t a t e d more easily than I used to. feel i r r i t a t e d a l l the time now. don't get i r r i t a t e d at a l l by the things that used to i r r i t a t e me.  12. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  have not lost interest in other people. . am less interested in other people than I used to be. have lost most of my interest in other people. have lost a l l of my interest in other people.  13. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  make decisions about as well as I ever could. put off making decisions more than I used to. have greater d i f f i c u l t y i n making decisions than before. can't make decisions at a l l anymore.  14. 0 1 2  I don't feel I look any worse than I used to. I am wcrried that I am looking old or unattractive. I f e e l that there are permanent changes in my appearance me look unattractive. I believe that I look ugly.  3  that make  15. 0 1 2 3  I can work about as well as before. I t takes an extra effort to get started at doing I have to push myself very hard to do anything. I can't do any work at a l l .  16. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  can sleep as well as usual. don't sleep as well as I used to. wake up 1-2 hours e a r l i e r than usual and find i t hard to get back to sleep. wake up several hours e a r l i e r than I used to and cannot get back to sleep.  17. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  don't get more tired than usual. get tired more easily than I used to. get tired from doing almost anything. am too t i r e d to do anything.  18. 0 1 2 3  My appetite i s no worse than usual My appetite i s not as good as i t used to be. My appetite i s much worse now. I have no appetite at a l l anymore.  19. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  20. 0 1  I am no more worried about my health than usual. I am worried about physical problems such as aches and pains; or upset stomach; or constipation. I am very worried about physical problems and i t ' s hard to think of much else. I am so worried about my physical problems, that I cannot think about anything else.  2 3 21. 0 1 2 3  I I I I  something.  haven't lost much weight, i f any l a t e l y . have lost more than 5 pounds. I am purposely trying to have lost more than 10 pounds. lose weight by eating less. have Inst more than 15 pounds. Yes No  have not noticed any recent change i n my interest in sex. am less interested in sex than I used to be. am much less interested in sex now. have lost interest in sex completely.  DAS  107  FORM A  This Inventory l i s t s different attitudes or beliefs which people sometimes hold.  Read  EACH statement carefully and decide how much you agree or disagree  with the statement. For each of the attitudes, show your answer by placing a checkmark (/) under the column that BEST DESCRIBES HOW YOU THINK. only one answer for each attitude. right answer or wrong answer to  Qe sure to choose  Because people are different, there i s no  the3e  statements.  To decide whether a given attitude i s t y p i c a l of your way of looicing at things, simply keep i n mind what you are l i k e MOST OP THE T I M E .  EXAMPLE: >>  ATTITUDES  3 o e« < o 1.  X OS  M  >  in  Cd  s Cd U  Si <  »  X  >>  •J  W E-i Cd X  •J  <  u  3  2  U  z  <  K  O  U  M < a in ta M a  uy  > w  3  X  o u < a w S M a  >* sa  •J <  •a cnM < H a  Most people are O.K. once you get to know them. •  Look at the example above.  •  To show how much a sentence describes your attitude,  you can check any point from t o t a l l y agree to t o t a l l y disagree.  In the above example,  the checkmark at "agree s l i g h t l y " indicates that t h i s statement i s somewhat t y p i c a l of the attitudes held by the person completing the inventory. Remember that your answer should describe the way you think NOW TURN THE PAGE AND BEGIN  Copyright  1978  by Arlene N. Weissman  MOST OF THE T I M E .  REMEMBER, ANSWER EACH STATEMENT ACCORDING TO THE WAV YOU THINK MOST OF THE TIME.  I. I t i s d i f f i c u l t to be happy unless one i s good looking. Intelligent, rich and creative. 2. Happiness i s more a matter of my attitude towards myself than the way other people f e e l about me. 3. People w i l l probably think less of me i f I make a mistake. 4. I f I do not do well a l l the time, people w i l l not respect me.  t  S. Talcing even a small risk i s foolish because the loss i s l i k e l y to be a disaster. 6. t t l a possible, to gain another person's respect without being especially talented at anything. 7. I cannot be happy unless most people I know admire me. 8. If a person asks for help, i t i s a sign of weakness.  i  .  TOTALLY DISAGREE  DISAGREE SLIGHTLY  NEUTRAL  AGREE SLIGHTLY  AGREE VERY MUCH  TOTALLY AGREE  ATTITUDES  DISAGREE VERY MUCH  108  OAS  9. Iff I do not do as wall as other people, i t means I an an inferior-human being. 10. If I f a i l at my work, then I an a f a i l u r e as a person. 11. If you cannot do something well, there i s l i t t l e point in doing i t at a l l . 12. Making mistakes i s fine because I can learn frota thesu. 13. If someone disagrees with me, i t probably indicates he does not l i k e me. 14. If I f a i l partly, i t i s as bad as being a complete f a i l u r e . IS. If other people know what you are r e a l l y l i k e , they w i l l think less of you. 16. I am nothing i f a person I love me.  doesn't love  17. One can get pleasure from an a c t i v i t y regardless of the end result. 18. People should have a reasonable likelihood of success before undertaking'anything.  TOTALLY DISAGREE  DISAGREE VERY MUCH  DISAGREE SLIGHTLY  NEUTRAL  .AGREE SLIGHTLY  ATTITUDES  AGREE VERY MUCH  TOTALLY AGREE  109  •J  Sx  <  20. If I don't set the highest standards for myself, I am l i k e l y to end up a secondrate person. 21. If I am to be a worthwhile person, I must be truly outstanding in at least one major respect. 22. People who have good ideas are more worthy than those who do not. 23. I should be upset i f £ make a mistake. 24. My own opinions of myself are more important than other's opinions of me. 2S. To be a good, moral, worthwhile person, I must help everyone who needs i t . 26. If I ask a question, i t makes me look inferior. 27. It i s awful to be disapproved of by people important to you. 28. If you don't have other pedpLe to Lean on, you are bound to be sad.  »4  Ol  a-  1.9. My value as a person depends greatly on what others think of toe.  S  &} cu 13 •C  Si ,  TOTALLY DISAGREE  ATTITUDES  ft  3  DISAGREE VERY MUCH  1  5 3 >«  DISAGREE SLIGHTLY  no  29. I can reach important goals without driving myself.  slave  30. It i s possible for a person to be scolded and not get upset. 31. I cannot trust other people because they might be cruel to me. 32. I f others d i s l i k e you, you cannot be happy. 33. I t i s best to give up your own interests in order to please other people. 34. My happiness depends more an other people than i t does on me. 35. I do not need the approval of other people i n order to be happy. 36. I f a person avoids problems, the problems tend to go away. 37. r can be happy even i f I miss out an many of the good things i n l i f e . 38. What other people think about me i s very Important. 39. Being isolated from others is" bound to lead to unhappiness. 40. I can find happiness without being loved by another person.  -  TOTALLY DISAGREE .  DISAGREE VERY MUCH  DISAGREE SLIGHTLY  MEUTRAL  . AGREE SLIGHTLY  ATTITUDES  AGREE VERY MUCH  TOTAIXY AGREE  Ill  112 Now yourself  watch talking  the s c r e e n .  the  videotape  carefully  and  imagine  t o the person whose f a c e you  Try to allow y o u r s e l f  to react  as  see  on  though  the two o f you are a c t u a l l y c a r r y i n g on a c o n v e r s a t i o n a f t e r meeting f o r the f i r s t time.  Be how  aware o f your  impressions o f t h i s  person  and  you f e e l about her.  When the v i d e o t a p e i s over, c o n t i n u e t o being  with  the  person  you  are  about  complete the second s e t of q u e s t i o n n a i r e s .  to  imagine  see,  and  QUESTIONNAIRES:  SET TWO  DO NOT OPEN UNTIL VIDEO IS OVER  We a r e now i n t e r e s t e d i n your response t o the person you have u s t seen.  P l e a s e complete the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e s on your  e e l i n g s , o p i n i o n s , t h o u g h t s , and r e a c t i o n s .  C o n t i n u e t o imagine  e i n g w i t h t h e p e r s o n you have j u s t seen as you f i l l uestionnaires. our mood.  The f i r s t  out the  t h r e e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l a s k you about  115  From the ten statements l i s t e d  below, please c i r c l e the number of the one  that best d e s c r i b e s how e l a t e d or depressed, now,  happy or unhappy you f e e l  right  at t h i s moment.  10. Complete e l a t i o n .  Rapturous joy and s o a r i n g e c s t a s y .  9. Very e l a t e d and i n very high s p i r i t s . 8. E l a t e d and i n high  Tremendous d e l i g h t and bouyancy.  spirits.  7. F e e l i n g very good and c h e e r f u l . 6. F e e l i n g preety good, 5. F e e l i n g a l i t t l e  "OK".  b i t low.  Just  so-so.  4. S p i r i t s low and somewhat "blue". 3. Depressed and f e e l i n g very low. 2. Temendously depressed.  "blue".  F e e l i n g t e r r i b l e , miserable  1. U t t e r d e p r e s s i o n and gloom.  (Continue  Definitely  Completely  to t h i n k about the person  down.  "just  awful."  A l l i s black and  you have j u s t seen)  leaden.  116  How  do you f e e l r i g h t now?  dimension. way  Some of the p a i r s may  than the o t h e r . ;-x—;  Each p a i r of words below d e s c r i b e s a f e e l i n g seen unusual, but you probably f e e l more one  Please put one check somewhere along each l i n e  ) to show how  you f e e l r i g h t now.  at an a c c u r a t e d e s c r i p t i o n of your  (Example:  Please take your time to a r r i v e  feelings.  Happy  Unhappy  Stimulated  Relaxed  Controlling  Controlled  Annoyed  Pleased  Calm  Excited  Influenced  Influential  Satisfied  Dissatisfied  Frenzied  Sluggish  In C o n t r o l  Cared f o r  Melancholic  Contented  Dull  Jittery  Awed  Important  Hopeful  Despairing  Wide Awake  Sleepy  Dominant  Submissive  Bored  Relaxed  Unaroused  Aroused  Guided  Autonomous  (Please continue t h i n k i n g about the person you have j u s t  seen)  117  On this sheet you w i l l find words which describe different moods and feelings. C i r c l e the number of a l l which describe how you feel right now, at this moment. 1  active  34  devoted  67  interested  100  satisfied  2  adventurous  35  disagreeable  68  irritated  101  secure  3  affectionate  36  discontented  69  jealous  102  shaky  4  afraid  37  discouraged  70  joyful  103  shy  5  agitated  38  disgusted  71  kindly  104  soothed  6  agreeable  39  displeased  72  lonely  105  steady  7  aggressive  40  energetic  73  lost  106  stubborn  8  alive  41  enraged  74  loving  107  stormy  9  alone  42  enthusiastic  75  low  108  strong  10  amiable  43  fearful  76  lucky  109  suffering  11  amused  44  fine  77  mad  110  sullen  12  angry  45  fit  78  mean  111  sun  13  annoyed  46  forlorn  79  meek  112  sympathetic  14  awful  47  frank  80  merry  113  tame  15  bashful  48  free  81  mild  114  tender  16  bitter  49  friendly  82  miserable  115  tense  17  blue  50  frightened  83  nervous  116  terrible  18  bored  51  furious  84  obliging  117  terrified  19  calm  52  gay  84  offended  118  thoughtful  20  cautious  53  gentle  86  outraged  119  timid  21  cheerful  54  glad  87  panicky  120  tormented  22  clean  55  gloomy  88  patient  121  understanding  23  complaining  56  good  89  predicted  122  unhappy  24  contented  57  good natured  90  pleased  123  unsociable  25  contrary  58  grim  91  pleasant  124  upset  26  cool  59  happy  92  polite  125  vexed  27  cooperative  60  healthy  93  powerful  126  warm  28  critical  61  hopeless  94  quiet  127  whole  29  cross  62  hostile  95  reckless  128  wild  30  cruel  63  impatient  96  rejected  129  willful  31  daring  64  incensed  97  rough  130  wilted  32  desperate  65  indignant  98  sad  131  worrying  33  destroyed  66  inspired  99  safe  131  young  (Please continue thinking about the person you have just seen)  118 OPINION SCALE What are your thoughts and opinions about the person you have just seen? Answer the following questions by c i r c l i n g one of the numbers on the 6-point scale given with each question. Consider the person in comparison with other acquaintances that you have. Work quickly. Your f i r s t impression i s probably best. 1.  Would you l i k e to meet this 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  2.  4  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  2  3  4  2  3  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  person?  4  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  2  3  4  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  2  3  4  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  2  3  4  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  Would you be w i l l i n g to have a person l i k e this supervise your work? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  9.  3  Would you be w i l l i n g to share an apartment with someone l i k e this? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  8.  2  Would you invite this person to your home? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  7.  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  Would you be w i l l i n g to have this person eat lunch with you often? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  6.  5  Would you be w i l l i n g to work on a job with this 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  5.  4  Would you l i k e to s i t next to this person on a 3 hour bus trip? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  4.  3  Would you ask this person for advice? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  3.  2  person?  2  3  4  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  How physically a t t r a c t i v e do you think this person i s ? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  2  3  4  10. How s o c i a l l y poised do you think this person i s ? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  2  3  4  conti mied,  119  OPINION SCALE, Cont'd....  11. How l i k e l y would i t be that this person could become a close friend of yours? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  2  3  4  5  6_ d e f i n i t e l y yes  12. How l i k e l y would you be to approve of a close relative dating a person with this kind of personality? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  2  3  4  5  6_ d e f i n i t e l y yes  13. How l i k e l y would you be to approve of a close r e l a t i v e marrying someone with a personality l i k e this? 1 d e f i n i t e l y no  2  3  4  5  6 d e f i n i t e l y yes  PREVIOUSLY COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL ON PAGES 120 TO 125 WAS NOT MICROFILMED. PLEASE REFER, IF NEED BE, TO THE ORIGINAL THESIS DEPOSITED IN THE UNIVERSITY CONFERRING THE DEGREE.  LES PAGES 120 A 125, DEJA PROTEGEES PAR LE DROIT D'AUTEUR, N'ONT PAS ETE MICRQFILMEES. VEUILLEZ VOUS REFERER, AU BESOIN, A LA THESE ORIGINALE DEPOSEE A L'UNIVERSITE QUI A CONFERE LE GRADE.  120 IMPACT MESSAGE INVENTORY (INI  - FORM II - 1976) Sex:  Name: Ap.e:  Subject p.unber:  This inventory contains words, phrases and statements which people use to describe how they f e e l when interacting with another person. You are to respond to this Inventory by indicating how accurately each of the following items describes your reactions to the person you have just seen. Respond to each item i n terms of how precisely i t describes the feelings t h i s person arouses i n you, the behaviors you want to direct toward her when she's around, and/or the descriptions of her that come to mind when you're with her. Indicate how each item describes your actual reactions by using the following scale: l=Not at a l l , 2=Somewhat, 3=Moderately so, 4«Very much so. In f i l l i n g out the following pages, f i r s t imagine you are i n this person's presence, i n the process of interacting with her. Focus on the immediate reactions you would be experiencing. Then read each of the following items and f i l l i n the number to the l e f t of the statement which best describes how you would be f e e l i n g and/or would want to behave i f you were actually, at thic moment, i n the person's presence. At the top of each page, i n bold print, i s a statement •.'hich i s to precede each of the items on that pa$e. Read this statement to yourself before reading each item; i t w i l l aid you i n imagining the presence of the person ycu have just seen. There are no right or wrong answers since different people react d i f f e r e n t l y to the same person. What we want you to indicate i s the extent to which each item accurately describes what you would be experiencing i f you were interacting right now with this person. Please be sure to f i l l in the one number which best answers ho.' accurately that item describes what you would be experiencing. For example, i f an item i s Somewhat descriptive of your reaction, f i l l i n the number 2 for Somewhat descriptive: 1  2 Thank you i n advance for your cooperation.  The Impact Message Inventory was developed by Donald J . Kiesler,' Jack C. Anchin, Michael J . Perkins, Bernard H. Chirico, Edgar M. Kyle, and Edward J . Federman of V i r g i n i a Commonwealth University, Richmond, V i r g i n i a . Copyright c 1975, 1976 by Donald J . Kiesler  121 1- Not at a l l  3- Moderately so  2- Somewhat  4- Very much so  WHEN I AM WITH THIS PERSON SHE MAKES ME FEEL 1.  bossed around.  17.  embarrassed for her.  2.  distant from her.  18.  frustrated because she won't defend her position.  3.  superior to her.  19.  loved.  4.  important.  20.  taken charge of.  5.  entertained.  21.  defensive.  6.  impersonal.  22.  curious as to why she avoids being alone.  7.  l i k e an intruder.  23.  dominant.  8.  i n charge.  24.  welcome with her.  9.  appreciated by her.  25.  as important to her as others in the group.  10.  part of the group when she's around.  26.  l i k e an impersonal audience.  11.  cold.  27.  uneasy.  12.  forced to shoulder a l l the responsibility.  28.  as though she should do i t herself.  13.  needed.  29.  admired.  14.  complimented.  30.  l i k e I'm just one of many friends.  15.  as i f she's the class clown.  16.  annoyed.  122 1- Not at a l l  3- Moderately so  2- Somewhat  4- Very much so  WHEN I AM WITH THIS PERSON IT APPEARS TO ME THAT... 1.  she wants to be the center of attraction.  17.  she's nervous around me.  2.  s h e doesn't want to get involved with me.  18.  whuLover I did would be okay with her.  3.  she i s most comfortable withdrawing into the background when an issue arises.  19.  she trusts me.  4.  she wants to pick by brain.  20.  she thinks other people find her interesting, amusing, fascinating and witty.  5.  she c a r r i e s her share of the load.  21.  she weighs situations i n terms of what she can get out of them.  6.  she wants me to put her on a pedestal.  22.  she'd rather be l e f t  7.  she'd rather be alone.  23.  she sees me as superior.  8.  she thinks she can't do anything for herself.  24.  she's genuinely me.  9.  her time i s mine i f I need i t .  25.  she wants to be with others.  10.  she wants everyone to l i k e her.  26.  she thinks she's always i n control of things.  11.  she thinks i t ' s every person for himself or herself.  27.  as far as she's concerned, I could just as easily be someone else.  12.  28. she thinks she w i l l be r i d i c u l e d i f she asserts herself with others.  she thinks she i s inadequate.  13.  she would accept whatever I said.  29.  she thinks I have most of the answers.  14.  she wants to be h e l p f u l .  30.  she enjoys being with people.  15.  she wants, to be the charming one.  16.  she's carrying a grudge.  alone.  interested in  123  1- Not at a l l  3- Moderately so  2- Somewhat  4- Very much so  WHEN I AM WITH THIS PERSON SHE MAKES ME FEEL THAT... 1.  I want to t e l l her to give someone else a chance to make a decision.  17.  I should do something to put her at ease.  2.  T should l>p cnutious about whnl I . say or do around her.  18.  I w;ini tii point out her good q u a l i t i e s to her.  3.  1 should be very gentle with her.  19.  I shouldn't hesitate to c a l l on her.  4.  I want her to disagree with me sometimes.  20.  I shouldn't take her seriously.  5.  I could lean on her for support.  21.  I should t e l l her she's often quite inconsiderate.  6.  1 want to put her down.  22.  I want to show her what she does is self-defeating.  7..  I'm going to intrude.  23.  I should t e l l her not to be so nervous around me.  8.  I should t e l l her to stand up for herself.  24.  I could ask her to do anything.  9.  I can ask her to carry her share of the load.  25.  I want to ask her why she constantly needs to be with other people.  10.  I could relax and she'd take charge.  26.  I want to protect myself.  11.  1 want to stay away from her.  27.  I should leave her alone.  12.  I should avoid putting her on the spot.  28.  I should gently help her begin to assumne r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for her own decisions.  13.  I could t e l l her anything and she would agree.  29.  I want to hear what she doesn't l i k e about me.  14.  I can join in the a c t i v i t i e s .  30.  I should l i k e her.  15.  I want to t e l l her she's obnoxious  16.  I want to get away from her.  124  We would now  like you to take a few seconds to picture yourself  spending time with the person you have seen on the videotape. Imagine as vividly as you can how you would be likely to feel and act when In her company. descriptions.  On the following page you will find a l i s t of personal Tor each word on the l l s l ,  Hie way you would be when with her.  Indicate how  ;ic.-i:ui  a lo I y It describes  The accuracy with which • word would  describe your responses Is to be judged on the following scale:  i  Extremely Inaccurate  2  Very inaccurate  3  £  Quite inaccurate  Slightly Inaccurate  I  Slightly accurate  £  Quite accurate  I  Very accurate  i Extremely accurate  Consider the word BOLD. How accurately would that word describe your responses to the person you have just seen?  If you think that this word is a quite accurate  description of how you would be with her, write the number "6" to the left of the item: 6  BOLD  If you think that this word is a sIiqhtIy Inaccurate description, write the number " 4 " next to It, If i t Is very Inaccurate, write the number " 2 " , etc.  Please answer a l l Items.  If you are uncertain of the meaning of a word, ask the  experimenter to define It for you.  If you find i t necessary, take a few seconds from time to time to imagine very vividly what It would be like to be around this person. around this person?  What would you be like  125  i  Extremely Inaccurate  OD  2 Very Inaccurate  1  Quite Inaccurate  BASHFUL  1  Slightly Inaccurate  I  Slightly accurate  §.  Quite accurate  I  Very accurate  i  Extremely accurate  (23) UNBOLD  (45) APPROACHABLE  02) UNCIVIL  (24) SELF-ASSURED  (46) BOASTLESS  03) BOASTFUL  (25) SELF-CONFIUtNl"  04) UNVAIN  (26) TIMID  (48) IMPOLITE  05) KIND  (27) RUTHLESS  (49) COURTEOUS  06) FORCEFUL  (28) SLY  (50) UNNEIGHBOURLY  07) UNDECEPTIVE  (29) ENTHUSIASTIC  (51) EXTROVERTED  (30) CRUEL  (52) HARD-HEARTED  09) SHY  (31) FLAUNTY  (53) UNDEMANDING  10) UNSELFCONSCIOUS  (32) FORCELESS  (54) JOVIAL  II ) PLEASANT  (33) OVERFORWARD  (55) DISSOCIAL  12) COMPANIONABLE  (34) UNDEVIOUS  (56) UNSPARKLING  13) DISTANT  (35) UNCUNNING  (57) DISCOURTEOUS  14) UNAUTHORITATIVE  (36) VIVACIOUS  (58) TENDER  15) SYMPATHETIC  (37) EXPLOITIVE  (59) FRIENDLY  16) ANTISOCIAL  (38) UNCOOPERATIVE  (60) COCKY  17) DOMINEERING  (39) PERKY  (61 ) IRON-HEARTED  18) PERS1 STENT  (40) ASSERTIVE  (62) TRICKY  19) UNAGGRESS1VE  (41) UNARGUMENTAT1VE  (63) GENTLE-HEARTED  20) WILY  (42) NEIGHBOURLY  (64) INTROVERTED  21) GENIAL  (43) UNSOCIABLE  C>5) DOMINANT  22) CORDIAL  (44) SELF-DOUBTING  (66) OUTGOING  08)  IMPERSONAL  '(47) GUILELESS  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0098146/manifest

Comment

Related Items