Attributional biases in subclinical depression: A schema‐based account

Abstract

AbstractNon‐depressed individuals exhibit a self‐serving attributional bias, taking more credit for success than for failure. Clinically and subclinically depressed people are less self‐serving, often to the point of making similar attributions (explanations) for successes and failures. The present studies evaluated a schematic account of these distinct attributional biases. Subclinically depressed and non‐depressed participants completed measures of attributional bias (the relative strength of ability attributions for success versus failure), schema‐based optimism (the relative expectedness of success versus failure) and self‐schemas of competence. Two studies evaluated a hypothesis derived from the schematic account: the greater the perceived competence and optimism, the more self‐serving the attributional bias. As predicted, (a) attributional bias scores covaried with optimism and competence scores in both magnitude and valence (or direction), (b) depressed‐non‐depressed differences in attributional biases paralleled differences in competence and optimism and (c) when attributional bias scores were adjusted for the effects of optimism or competence, depressed–non‐depressed differences in attributional biases were eliminated. The schematic account raises questions about the common assumptions that attributional patterns are traits, and that they play a central role in the aetiology and treatment of depression. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.