Gender differences in rumination: A meta-analysis.
Gender differences in rumination: A meta-analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.019
复制
发表时间：
2013-08
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Whisman MA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Johnson DP;Whisman MA
从青春期开始一直持续到成年，女性患抑郁症的可能性是男性的两倍。根据反应风格理论（RST），抑郁症的性别差异部分是由于女性比男性更倾向于沉思。采用荟萃分析评估成人反刍行为的性别差异（k = 59; N = 14,321）；此外，对反刍的亚型——沉思和反思进行了分析（k = 23）。固定效应分析表明，女性在反刍（d = 0.24, p < 0.01, SEd = 0.02）、沉思（d = 0.19, p < 0.01, SEd = 0.03）和反思（d = 0.17, p < 0.01, SEd = 0.03）方面得分高于男性；没有证据表明这些效应量的研究存在异质性或发表偏倚。尽管有统计学意义，但反刍中性别差异的效应量很小。结果讨论了抑郁症的RST和性别差异。
Starting in adolescence and continuing through adulthood, women are twice as likely as men to experience depression. According to the response styles theory (RST), gender differences in depression result, in part, from women’s tendency to ruminate more than men. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate gender differences in rumination in adults (k = 59; N = 14,321); additionally, an analysis of subtypes of rumination – brooding and reflection – was conducted (k = 23). Fixed effects analyses indicated that women scored higher than men in rumination (d = .24, p < .01, SEd = .02), brooding (d = .19, p < .01, SEd = .03) and reflection (d = .17, p < .01, SEd = .03); there was no evidence of heterogeneity or publication bias across studies for these effect sizes. Although statistically significant, the effect sizes for gender differences in rumination were small in magnitude. Results are discussed with respect to the RST and gender differences in depression.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.9
作者：
Duval, S;Tweedie, R
通讯作者：
Tweedie, R
坦普尔-威斯康星州抑郁症认知脆弱性项目：抑郁症高认知风险和低认知风险个体的轴 I 精神病理学终生史
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Alloy, LB;Abramson, LY;Lapkin, JB
通讯作者：
Lapkin, JB
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Cambron, M. Janelle;Acitelli, Linda K.
通讯作者：
Acitelli, Linda K.
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Conway, Michael;Alfonsi, Giuseppe;Giannopoulos, Constantina
通讯作者：
Giannopoulos, Constantina
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Goldstein, BI
通讯作者：
Goldstein, BI