Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
2
pubmed:dateCreated
1995-3-22
pubmed:abstractText
Various hypotheses have been proposed concerning the attributional styles of depressive and nondepressive persons. Some hypotheses are compatible with others; some are mutually exclusive. In this paper we present a scheme for organizing these hypotheses. A method is offered for deciding which hypothesis best fits data from samples which are heterogeneous with regard to extent of depression. The concepts reviewed include "self-serving bias," "counter-self-serving bias," "evenhandedness," "depressive lower self-enhancement," "counter-defensive attribution," the "Abramson, et al. hypothesis" that depressed persons attribute events with bad outcomes more to internal, stable, and global causes than do nondepressed persons, and the "Seligman, et al. hypothesis" that depressed persons attribute events of good outcome less to these causes than do nondepressed persons.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Oct
pubmed:issn
0033-2941
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
75
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
899-904
pubmed:dateRevised
2010-11-18
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1994
pubmed:articleTitle
A conceptual scheme for assessing evenhandedness and (counter) self-serving attributional biases in relation to depression.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Hospital of the Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study