IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v78y2020ics0160289619302028.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differential associations between rumination and intelligence subtypes

Author

Listed:
  • du Pont, Alta
  • Karbin, Zoe
  • Rhee, Soo Hyun
  • Corley, Robin P.
  • Hewitt, John K.
  • Friedman, Naomi P.

Abstract

Although prior theory suggests that rumination contributes to cognitive impairments associated with depression, recent work suggests that rumination is associated with higher levels of intelligence. The present study examined the relations between two ruminative subtypes (brooding and reflective pondering) and multiple measures and types of intelligence (verbal and performance) after controlling for rumination's overlapping variance with depression. Participants were 751 individuals from the Colorado Longitudinal Twin Study who completed the Ruminative Response Scale; the Center for Epidemiological Studies–Depression Scale and a fully structured clinical interview as measures of depression; and verbal and performance intelligence tasks at age 16 and the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices at age 23. Reflective pondering was positively associated with all measures of intelligence, whereas brooding was not associated with intelligence. Our findings indicate that any negative associations between rumination and intelligence are attributable to shared variance with depression, and that examination of rumination as a multifaceted construct may provide new insights into the relations between rumination and cognition.

Suggested Citation

  • du Pont, Alta & Karbin, Zoe & Rhee, Soo Hyun & Corley, Robin P. & Hewitt, John K. & Friedman, Naomi P., 2020. "Differential associations between rumination and intelligence subtypes," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:78:y:2020:i:c:s0160289619302028
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2019.101420
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289619302028
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101420?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tatel, Corey E. & Tidler, Zachary R. & Ackerman, Phillip L., 2022. "Process differences as a function of test modifications: Construct validity of Raven's advanced progressive matrices under standard, abbreviated and/or speeded conditions – A meta-analysis," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:78:y:2020:i:c:s0160289619302028. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.