Chronic Fatigue Syndrome - personality and attributional style of patients in comparison to healthy controls and depressed individuals

Abstract

Aspects of personality or attributional style may account for the previously reported (Farmer et al., 1996) discrepancy between self-reported and objectively rated psychiatric morbidity in subjects with operationally defined Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975) and the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ) (Peterson et al., 1982) have been administered to CFS patients, depressed subjects and two healthy control groups for comparison. Sixty-two CFS subjects and 48 psychologically healthy controls completed the EPQ. Fifty CFS subjects, 100 healthy controls and 37 depressed individuals completed the ASQ. CFS subjects with concurrent depression scored significantly higher than CFS subjects without depression or healthy controls on the neuroticism subscale of the EPQ. For the social desirability subscale, CFS patients scored no different from the controls. The attributional style of CFS patients for good events resembled the healthy group. However, CFS patients tend to view bad events as due to external factors beyond personal control yet which are immutable (stable) and which affect all aspects of life (global). Composite ASQ scores for bad events for CFS patients with concurrent depression resembled the depressed group while the non-depressed CFS patient's responses resembled healthy subjects. Scores on the EPQ and ASQ in CFS subjects are no different from healthy controls except for those CFS subjects who are also concurrently depressed where the scores resemble patients with depression. Thus these measures have not explained the discrepant self-report and clinical interview rating of psychiatric morbidity in CFS patients. However, the external, global and stable attributions for bad events may explain the immutable views some CFS patients have regarding the physical nature of their illness.