Search

The Ruminative Response Scale (RRS) is commonly used to measure people's general tendency to ruminate. In this study, we explored whether only few items from the RRS can be used to capture within-person variation in rumination in intensive longitudinal studies. Such a short RRS version would allow, for example, monitoring the development of rumination during clinical interventions. We measured rumination on five occasions, with at least one week in between. We used multilevel analyses to analyze the data at the within- and between-person level. Using only eight RRS items, we successfully modeled a reflective self-regulation and depressive brooding factor, similar to the two subfacets of rumination as distinguished by Treynor et al. (2003 (See CR28)). We also established convergent validity of depressive brooding at the within- and between-person level of analysis and convergent validity of reflection at the between-person level. We thus introduced a short form of the RRS that captures within-person variation in depressive brooding and reflection well. The short RRS is readily applicable in studies on within-person variation or change in rumination., Author(s): Annette Brose [sup.1] [sup.2] [sup.3] , Rudi De Raedt [sup.4] , Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt [sup.4] [sup.5] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.7468.d, 0000 0001 2248 7639, Institute of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, [...]

In the literature on aversive conditioning there is still debate on the role of awareness. According to some authors, affective learning can occur with or without contingency learning (dual-process model), whereas others argue that a single process produces both affective responses and contingency knowledge. Although many studies have investigated these models, the results to date are inconclusive. Based on a review of the literature, a new series of experiments was designed to examine aversive conditioning in the absence of contingency awareness. In the present study we examined the effects of subliminal aversive conditioning on a spatial cueing task. Awareness was stringently tested after conditioning. Three kinds of awareness were distinguished: contingency awareness (awareness of the CS-US contingencies, where CS is the conditioned stimulus, and US is the unconditioned stimulus), perceptual awareness (awareness of the perceptual differences between the CSs), and US expectancy (awareness of a threat feeling when confronted with the CS+, but not when confronted with the CS-). The results of three experiments demonstrated that responses on the spatial cueing task were modulated by subliminal aversive conditioning. Importantly, none of the participants was contingency aware or able to perceptually discriminate between the conditioned stimuli. However, in Experiment 3, only those participants showing some level of postconditioning expectancy awareness exhibited conditioning effects. These experiments suggest that subliminal aversive conditioning produces small but significant effects, which may be modulated by expectancy awareness.