Depressive Realism: Are Depressed People Just More Realistic?

Definition

Depressive Realism

Depressive realism is the hypothesis developed by Lauren Alloy and Lyn Yvonne Abramson that depressed individuals make more realistic inferences than non-depressed individuals. Although depressed individuals are thought to have a negative cognitive bias that results in recurrent, negative automatic thoughts, maladaptive behaviors, and dysfunctional world beliefs, depressive realism argues not only that this negativity may reflect a more accurate appraisal of the world but also that non-depressed individuals' appraisals are positively biased. Some have argued that the evidence is not more conclusive because no standard for reality exists, the diagnoses are dubious, and the results may not apply to the real world.

Main Digest

Sadder ≠ Wiser: Depressive Realism is not Robust to Replication

Are depressed people simply more realistic in judging how much they control their lives, while others view the world through rose-colored lenses, living under the illusion that they have more control than they do? That's the general idea behind "depressive realism," a theory that has held sway in science and popular culture for over four decades. The problem is, it's just not true, new research finds.

advertisement

"It's an idea that exerts enough appeal that lots of people seem to believe it, but the evidence just isn't there to sustain it," says Professor Don Moore, the Lorraine Tyson Mitchell Chair in Leadership and Communication at UC Berkeley's Haas School of Business and co-author of the study, in press at the journal Collabra: Psychology. "The good news is you don't have to be depressed to understand how much control you have."

Depressive Realism

The concept of depressive realism stems from a 1979 study of college students examining whether they could predict how much control they had over whether a light turned green when they pushed a button. The original research concluded that the depressed students were better at identifying when they had no control over the lights. In contrast, those who weren't depressed tended to overestimate their level of control.

Moore and his colleagues tried to replicate those findings as part of a broader effort to restore trust in scientific research, much of which is woven into the fabric of the scientific community and wider culture. Researchers are revisiting bedrock studies to shore up the most basic scientific principles: Can the research and its conclusions be replicated?

Why test the theory of depressive realism in particular? Moore says its decades-long infusion into science, culture, and potential mental health treatment policy makes it important. The original study, for instance, was cited more than 2,000 times in subsequent studies or research, according to Google Scholar.

"At the top of the list of reasons why we ought to revisit this particular article is its widespread acceptance in both the scholarly and popular literature," says Moore, who studies overconfidence, confidence, and decision-making. "That means a lot of people are building theories or policies premised on this effect being true. If it's not, it's really important to establish that."

Article continues below image.

Continued...

Replicating the Original Study

Moore co-authored the study with the University of California Berkeley psychology professor Sheri Johnson and former undergraduate student researcher Karin Garrett, BA 21, along with University of Miami doctoral student Amelia Dev, BA 17.

The authors studied two groups of participants, whom they screened for depression via a questionnaire. The first group of 248 participants came from Amazon's Mechanical Turk. This online service provides paid survey-takers and study participants from various backgrounds, in this case, all over 18 years old. The second group was made up of 134 college students who participated in return for college credit.

The researchers added or used more modern and robust measurements for the study. For example, they added a mechanism to measure bias, and experimentally varied the amount of control participants actually had.

Participants performed a task similar to the 1979 study. In 40 rounds, each chose whether to press a button, after which a lightbulb or a black box appeared. Each was told to figure out whether pushing (or not pushing) the button impacted whether the light came on. After the rounds, each reported how much control they had over the light.

The online and college student groups were split into three experimental conditions. Each condition experienced different relationships between the button and the light during the 40 rounds. The participants in the first two conditions had no actual control over the light's appearance yet saw it illuminate one-quarter or three-quarters of the time, respectively. Participants in the third condition had some control, seeing the light three-quarters of the time after pushing the button.

The researchers could not replicate the original study's results. People in the online group with a higher level of depression overestimated their control in direct contradiction to the original study. The researchers note that that finding may be driven by anxiety rather than depression, an observation Moore says merits further study.

In the college student group, depression levels had little impact on their view of their control, the authors found.

Researchers also tested for overconfidence. Study participants were asked to estimate their scores on an intelligence test. Depression had no impact there, either.

Results Undermine the Theory

The results, Moore says, undermined his belief in depressive realism.

"The study does not suggest that there are benefits to being depressed, so no one should seek depression as a cure to their cognitive biases," Moore says.

Imagine, for example, a manager hiring someone who is depressed because they believe-based in the original study-that, the person is less likely to be overconfident and will have better judgment. That would be a mistake, Moore says.

While depression may not improve judgment, the issue of how to accurately gauge our level of control in various situations has broader implications throughout life, Moore says.

"We live with a great deal of uncertainty about how much control we have over our careers, our health, our body weight, our friendships, or our happiness," says Moore. "What actions can we take that matter? If we want to make good choices in life, it's beneficial to know what we control and don't."

Attribution/Source(s):

This peer reviewed article relating to our Depression section was selected for publishing by the editors of Disabled World due to its likely interest to our disability community readers. Though the content may have been edited for style, clarity, or length, the article "Depressive Realism: Are Depressed People Just More Realistic?" was originally written by University of California - Berkeley Haas, and published by Disabled-World.com on 2022-10-11 (Updated: 2023-01-04). Should you require further information or clarification, University of California - Berkeley Haas can be contacted at haas.berkeley.edu. Disabled World makes no warranties or representations in connection therewith.

Share This Information To:
𝕏.com Facebook Reddit

advertisement

Disabled World is an independent disability community founded in 2004 to provide disability news and information to people with disabilities, seniors, their family and/or carers. See our homepage for informative reviews, exclusive stories and how-tos. You can connect with us on social media such as X.com and our Facebook page.

Permalink: <a href="https://www.disabled-world.com/health/neurology/depression/depressive-realism.php">Depressive Realism: Are Depressed People Just More Realistic?</a>

Cite This Page (APA): University of California - Berkeley Haas. (2022, October 11). Depressive Realism: Are Depressed People Just More Realistic?. Disabled World. Retrieved September 22, 2023 from www.disabled-world.com/health/neurology/depression/depressive-realism.php

Disabled World provides general information only. The materials presented are never meant to substitute for qualified professional medical care, nor should they be construed as such. Funding is derived from advertisements or referral programs. Any 3rd party offering or advertising does not constitute an endorsement.