Subscribe: Psychological Bulletin - Vol 134, Iss 3
Preview: Psychological Bulletin - Vol 134, Iss 3

Psychological Bulletin - Vol 142, Iss 10

Psychological Bulletin publishes evaluative and integrative research reviews and interpretations of issues in scientific psychology. Primary research is reported only for illustrative purposes. Integrative reviews or research syntheses focus on empirical

Last Build Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 23:00:26 EST

Copyright: Copyright 2016 American Psychological Association

A meta-analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence.


This meta-analysis evaluated the relation between social support and depression in youth and compared the cumulative evidence for 2 theories that have been proposed to explain this association: the general benefits (GB; also known as main effects) and stress-buffering (SB) models. The study included 341 articles (19% unpublished) gathered through a search in PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, ERIC, and ProQuest, and a hand search of 11 relevant journals. Using a random effects model, the overall effect size based on k = 341 studies and N = 273,149 participants was r = .26 (95% CI [.24, .28]), with robust support for the GB model and support for the SB model among medically ill youth. Stress-buffering analyses suggest that different stressful contexts may not allow youth to fully draw on the benefits of social support, and we propose value in seeking to better understand both stress-buffering (effects of social support are enhanced) and reverse stress-buffering (effects of social support are dampened) processes. Key findings regarding other moderators include a different pattern of effect sizes across various sources of support. In addition, gender differences were largely absent from this study, suggesting that social support may be a more critical resource for boys than is typically acknowledged. Results also demonstrated the importance of using instruments with adequate psychometric support, with careful consideration of methodological and conceptual issues. Building upon these collective findings, we provide recommendations for theory and practice, as well as recommendations for addressing limitations in the extant literature to guide future investigations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)(image)

“A qualitative meta-analysis examining clients’ experiences of psychotherapy: A new agenda": Correction to Levitt, Pomerville, and Surace (2016).


Reports an error in "A qualitative meta-analysis examining clients’ experiences of psychotherapy: A new agenda" by Heidi M. Levitt, Andrew Pomerville and Francisco I. Surace (Psychological Bulletin, 2016[Aug], Vol 142[8], 801-830). In the article, the 2nd sentence in the Broadening the Forms of Power When Considering Client–Therapist Differences section, “Indeed, most of the studies (55/66, 83.3%) in these categories focused either on the power differential within the therapeutic relationship (37) or culturally based power differences between therapists and clients (29).” should read: “Indeed, most of the studies (49/59, 83.1%) in these categories focused either on the power differential within the therapeutic relationship (38) or culturally based power differences between therapists and clients (31).” (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2016-21269-001.) This article argues that psychotherapy practitioners and researchers should be informed by the substantive body of qualitative evidence that has been gathered to represent clients’ own experiences of therapy. The current meta-analysis examined qualitative research studies analyzing clients’ experiences within adult individual psychotherapy that appeared in English-language journals. This omnibus review integrates research from across psychotherapy approaches and qualitative methods, focusing on the cross-cutting question of how clients experience therapy. It utilized an innovative method in which 67 studies were subjected to a grounded theory meta-analysis in order to develop a hierarchy of data and then 42 additional studies were added into this hierarchy using a content meta-analytic method—summing to 109 studies in total. Findings highlight the critical psychotherapy experiences for clients, based upon robust findings across these research studies. Process-focused principles for practice are generated that can enrich therapists’ understanding of their clients in key clinical decision-making moments. Based upon these findings, an agenda is suggested in which research is directed toward heightening therapists’ understanding of clients and recognizing them as agents of change within sessions, supporting the client as self-healer paradigm. This research aims to improve therapists’ sensitivity to clients’ experiences and thus can expand therapists’ attunement and intentionality in shaping interventions in accordance with whichever theoretical orientation is in use. The article advocates for the full integration of the qualitative literature in psychotherapy research in which variables are conceptualized in reference to an understanding of clients’ experiences in sessions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)(image)

Differences in sensitivity to parenting depending on child temperament: A meta-analysis.


Several models of individual differences in environmental sensitivity postulate increased sensitivity of some individuals to either stressful (diathesis-stress), supportive (vantage sensitivity), or both environments (differential susceptibility). In this meta-analysis we examine whether children vary in sensitivity to parenting depending on their temperament, and if so, which model can best be used to describe this sensitivity pattern. We tested whether associations between negative parenting and negative or positive child adjustment as well as between positive parenting and positive or negative child adjustment would be stronger among children higher on putative sensitivity markers (difficult temperament, negative emotionality, surgency, and effortful control). Longitudinal studies with children up to 18 years (k = 105 samples from 84 studies, Nmean = 6,153) that reported on a parenting-by-temperament interaction predicting child adjustment were included. We found 235 independent effect sizes for associations between parenting and child adjustment. Results showed that children with a more difficult temperament (compared with those with a more easy temperament) were more vulnerable to negative parenting, but also profited more from positive parenting, supporting the differential susceptibility model. Differences in susceptibility were expressed in externalizing and internalizing problems and in social and cognitive competence. Support for differential susceptibility for negative emotionality was, however, only present when this trait was assessed during infancy. Surgency and effortful control did not consistently moderate associations between parenting and child adjustment, providing little support for differential susceptibility, diathesis-stress, or vantage sensitivity models. Finally, parenting-by-temperament interactions were more pronounced when parenting was assessed using observations compared to questionnaires. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)(image)

Attention and associative learning in humans: An integrative review.


This article presents a comprehensive survey of research concerning interactions between associative learning and attention in humans. Four main findings are described. First, attention is biased toward stimuli that predict their consequences reliably (learned predictiveness). This finding is consistent with the approach taken by Mackintosh (1975) in his attentional model of associative learning in nonhuman animals. Second, the strength of this attentional bias is modulated by the value of the outcome (learned value). That is, predictors of high-value outcomes receive especially high levels of attention. Third, the related but opposing idea that uncertainty may result in increased attention to stimuli (Pearce & Hall, 1980), receives less support. This suggests that hybrid models of associative learning, incorporating the mechanisms of both the Mackintosh and Pearce-Hall theories, may not be required to explain data from human participants. Rather, a simpler model, in which attention to stimuli is determined by how strongly they are associated with significant outcomes, goes a long way to account for the data on human attentional learning. The last main finding, and an exciting area for future research and theorizing, is that learned predictiveness and learned value modulate both deliberate attentional focus, and more automatic attentional capture. The automatic influence of learning on attention does not appear to fit the traditional view of attention as being either goal-directed or stimulus-driven. Rather, it suggests a new kind of “derived” attention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)(image)