Abstract

Rumination is a recurrent and repetitive manner of thinking that can be triggered by blockage of personally relevant goals, creating a temporary state of abstract and evaluative self-focus. Particularly when focused on passive “brooding” over one’s problems and feelings, however, rumination can increase negative affect, interfere with problem-solving, and, through a negative feedback cycle, become a chronic trait-like style of responding to personal challenges, particularly in women. Given the pervasiveness of rumination and its potential impact on cognitive processes and emotional states, the present study asks how it impacts attention to feedback that either reminds individuals of goal-state discrepancies (reminders of errors) or could help to remediate them (corrective information). Using eye-tracking, we examined both state and trait rumination effects on overt measures of attention [first fixation duration (FFD) and total fixation duration (TFD)] during simultaneous presentation of these two types of feedback following failed attempts to answer challenging verbal general knowledge questions (average accuracy ∼30%). After a pre-induction baseline, we induced either a state of rumination using a series of writing exercises centered on the description of an unresolved academic concern or a state of distraction by centering writing on the description of a neutral school day. Within our women-only sample, the Rumination condition, which writing analysis showed was dominated by moody brooding, resulted in some evidence for increased initial dwell time (FFD) on reminders of incorrect answers, while the Distraction condition, which did not elicit any rumination during writing, resulted in increased FFD on the correct answer. Trait brooding augmented the expression of the more negative, moody brooding content in the writing samples of both Induction conditions, but only influenced TFD measures of gaze duration and only during the pre-induction baseline, suggesting that once the inductions activated rumination or distraction states, these suppressed the trait effects in this sample. These results provide some support for attentional-bias models of rumination (attentional scope model, impaired disengagement hypothesis) and have implications for how even temporary states of rumination or distraction might impact processing of academic feedback under conditions of challenge and failure.

Highlights

  • Rumination is a recurrent and repetitive manner of thinking that can be triggered by blockage of personally relevant goals, creating a temporary state of abstract and evaluative selffocus that can eventually lead to a more chronic, trait-like style of ruminative responding to personal challenges (Watkins and Nolen-Hoeksema, 2014)

  • Theorists in both cognitive and clinical domains have identified a tendency to habitually ruminate in response to personal challenges and negative mood states as being integral to the development of depression, especially for women (e.g., Nolen-Hoeksema, 1987; Nolen-Hoeksema and Morrow, 1991; Watkins and Teasdale, 2001)

  • The ability of the induction to elicit Ruminative Brooding (RB) writing content was related to trait rumination, the state induction itself appeared sufficient to override any influence of these trait tendencies on behavior, and least in this female sample that was not clinically depressed

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Rumination is a recurrent and repetitive manner of thinking that can be triggered by blockage of personally relevant goals, creating a temporary state of abstract and evaluative selffocus that can eventually lead to a more chronic, trait-like style of ruminative responding to personal challenges (Watkins and Nolen-Hoeksema, 2014). Prominent models of rumination [Martin and Tesser’s (1996) Control Theory; Nolen-Hoeksema’s (1987) Response Styles Theory] describe both temporary (state) and chronic (trait) rumination as being maladaptive for both affect and goal-directed behavior (for a review, see NolenHoeksema et al, 2008) This is the case for the Ruminative Brooding (RB) subtype, which produces a sustained, but unproductive focus of attention on negative outcomes and their associated feelings. Few studies have examined the effects of either ruminative subtype within an academically relevant context (e.g., Lyubomirsky et al, 2003; Ciarocco et al, 2010) This is surprising given that students may face various types of cognitive and affective challenges during difficult performance assessments. We used fixation dwell time to evaluate selective attention when the correct answer was presented simultaneously and in competition with reminders of one’s recent mistake

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call