DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 1
Does positive rumination predict psychological resilience?
Molly Tuck
PSYC 30920
The University of Manchester
April 2014
Word Count: 5,863
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 2
Table of Contents
Abstract
Research suggests that high levels of psychological resilience are associated with positive
mental health outcomes. Therefore enhancing resilience could have substantial benefits to
Abstract………………………………………………………………………………….
3
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………...
4
Method…………………………………………………………………………………
10
Results………………………………………………………………………………….
16
Discussion……………………………………………………………………………...
22
Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………….....
27
References……………………………………………………………………………...
28
Appendices……………………………………………………………………………..
39
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 3
individuals. Research examining the relationship between positive rumination and resilience
is sparse, while the links between resilience and factors such as problem solving, emotional
regulation and social support are well understood. For the present study, a total of 30
undergraduate students were recruited and completed eight questionnaire measures, although
one outlying participant was removed for analysis purposes. A multiple regression model was
used in order to determine, firstly, whether positive rumination predicted psychological
resilience and, secondly, to explore which variable, amongst positive rumination, problem
solving, social support and emotional regulation, was the stronger predictor of psychological
resilience. Positive rumination was found to not predict psychological resilience, while
problem solving was observed as the strongest predictor of resilience. Nevertheless, given the
potential clinical relevance of positive rumination and the pioneering nature of this area
research, further analysis using wider and more generalizable samples along with additional
assessment of the underpinning mechanisms of positive rumination should be pursued.
Introduction
Mental health issues affect an estimated 450 million people worldwide and current
figures in Britain indicate that each year one in four adults will experience at least one
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 4
diagnosable mental health problem (Counselling Directory, n.d.). The high prevalence and
debilitating impact of mental health consequently makes prevention a priority for health
practitioners (HM Government/DH, 2011). Conventionally, negative mental health outcomes
have been explored from a risk-based approach, centered on analyzing the negative and
maladaptive processes associated with the pathway to mental illness (Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). However, risk factors are not the only predictor of outcomes for
individuals. Therefore, this approach may not be the most effective way to study mental
health (Seligman, Steen, Park & Peterson, 2005). The observation that not all individuals in
conditions of high risk succumb to negative mental health (Hawton & Van Heeringen, 2009),
suggests variable levels of protective factors that influence outcomes. It may therefore be
more constructive to emphasize optimism by identifying and developing positive
psychological processes that could act as protective mechanisms and ameliorate an
individual's response to adversity (Tarrier, 2010).
Central to this protective approach is the concept of psychological resilience (Masten,
2001). Psychological resilience has been identified as a pivotal protective mechanism that
operates in conditions of high risk in order to prevent the occurrence of psychiatric disorders
(Bryant, West &Windle, 1997). It has been well documented that resilience has a moderating
effect on the associations between negative life events and mental health problems (Peng,
1994; Pinquart, 2009; Armstrong, Galligan & Critchley, 2011). Ong, Bergeman, Bisconti, and
Wallace (2006) as well as Patel and Goodman (2007) associated the concept of resilience with
promotion of good mental health. Additionally, both Rew and Horner (2003) and Roy and
Sarchiapone (2011) found that children and adolescents with high resilience could generally
maintain high quality mental health in the face of negative events. Therefore, enhancing
resilience can have wide reaching benefits for individuals in relation to mental health
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 5
outcomes.
The concept of psychological resilience has been used to describe a plethora of
characteristics (Masten & Reed, 2002) including, inter alia, the capacity to effectively adapt to
change (Cicchetti & Cohen, 1995), the characteristics of hardiness and invulnerability
(Kobasa, 1979), and the capability to thrive in the face of adversity (Connor, 2006). Although
resilience is a widely used concept, it has faced definitional challenges (Manyena, 2006).
Resilience studies vary considerably in their definition and measurement, with these
shortcomings consequently casting doubt on the utility of resilience as a theoretical construct
(Davydov, Stewart, Ritchie, & Chaudieu, 2010). For the purposes of this study the definition
set out by the Johnson, Gooding, Wood & Tarrier, (2010) will be utilised. This is specifically,
the ability or perceived ability of an individual to overcome problems, or a set of positive
beliefs or resources, which can act as a buffer in the face of adversity.
The mechanics underlying resilience have been grounded in psychological theory.
The Buffering Hypothesis (Cohen and Wills, 1985; Johnson, Wood, Gooding, Taylor &
Tarrier, 2011) offers one explanation, suggesting that resilience acts to moderate or buffer
individuals against risk factors, which in turn prevents detrimental mental health outcomes.
Therefore, resilience is not just the absence of such risk factors, but also a buffering
mechanism against these factors. Increasing resilience could, as a result, have substantial
benefits to individuals when in conditions of high risk.
Research has attempted to breakdown psychological resilience into its specific
components. Johnson, Gooding & Tarrier, (2008) established a theoretical model called the
Schematic Appraisals Model of Suicide (SAMS). This provided a valuable framework under
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 6
which resilience could be understood and explored empirically, with particular reference to
suicide. The model postulated that positive self-appraisals were a key source of resilience.
Enhancing these appraisals may therefore contribute to buffering individuals against suicide.
The SAMS further suggests three types of positive self-appraisals may be key in buffering
individuals from suicidal thoughts. Specifically, these are the individual's ability to: regulate
emotions, solve problems, and gain social support. Johnson et al., (2010) developed the
Resilience Appraisal Scale (RAS), which is an objective measure based on the predictions set
out by the SAMS. Using a student sample they tested whether positive self-appraisals
comprising of problem solving appraisal, perceived social support and perceived emotional
regulation buffered the impact of negative life events in the development of suicidality. They
found individuals who self-reported moderate or high levels of positive self- appraisal, did not
experience heightened suicidality. This supports the predictions set out by the SAMS. Connor
& Davidson’s (2003) self-report instrument, the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-
RISC), designed to establish the norms in resilience, also supported these components of
resilience by reference to, inter alia, tolerance of negative affect, positive acceptance of
change, sense of social support, and an action-oriented approach to problem solving.
Extensive research has reinforced the relationship between resilience and problem
solving, emotional regulation and social support. Problem solving is defined as the capability
to plan, resourcefully seek help from external sources and to think creatively, critically, and
reflectively (Benard, 1995) where the relevant appraisal refers to an individual’s self-appraisal
of his/her problem-solving abilities (Heppner, He, Tsai, and Lin, 2008). Research has
consistently reported problem-solving ability as a component of resilience (Neiger, 1991;
Bernard, 1994; Rutter, 1999). For example, when studying resilient children the presence of
well-developed problem-solving skills has been found to be commonplace (Rutter, 1984;
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 7
Brookes & Goldstein, 2001). Holahan, Moos, Holahan & Brennan (1995) defined social
support as the social means that individuals feel to be available to them or that are actually
offered to them by external sources. Parental warmth, cohesion and care within the family, or
a close relationship with a caring adult are commonly associated with resilient young people
(Bond, Burns, Vella-Brodrick & Sawyer 2003). Moreover, Ozbay et al., (2007) found positive
social support of high quality can enhance resilience considerably. Finally, emotional
regulation is defined as the process that individuals consciously or unconsciously alter their
emotions (Gross & Thompson, 2007). Peng et al., (2014) explored emotion regulation and
found it played an important role in the resilience of students. Additionally, Min, Yu, Lee &
Chae (2013) also investigated cognitive emotion regulation strategies in a sample of patients
suffering from depression and/or anxiety disorders and their contribution to resilience. Their
findings suggested that the cognitive emotion regulation strategies of positive re-appraisal, a
focus on planning, and less rumination contributed positively to resilience.
The benefits of positive emotions have been examined in the “broaden-and-build
theory” (Fredrickson, 1998; Fredrickson, 2003; Fredrickson, 2004). This hypothesizes that
positive emotions broaden individuals' thought–action repertoires, assisting individuals in
accessing a range of perceptions, actions and ideas. This broadened cognition consequently
allows behavioral flexibility that builds mindfulness, resilience and mental health (Cohn,
Fredrickson, Brown, Mikels & Conway, 2009). Psychologically resilient individuals have
been shown to experience these increased positive emotions (Ong, Zautra & Reid, 2010). This
supports their role as an active ingredient within resilience, which in turn has been found to
reduce the risk of depression. (Fredrickson, Tugade, Waugh & Larkin, 2003).
Negative emotions are now understood to constrict the scope of an individual’s
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 8
attention and thinking (Schmitz, De Rosa & Anderson, 2009; Talarico, LaBar & Ruben
2004). Less is however understood about the positive processes, which have the potential to
serve as pivotal factors in preventing negative mental health outcomes (Feldman, Joormann,
& Johnson, 2008). In particular, positive rumination is an under-researched process that has
been defined as ‘repetitive positive self- and symptom-focused responses to positive mood’
(Feldman et al., 2008). Negative rumination, in contrast, is characterized by recurring,
pervasive thoughts about the symptoms, causes, and future repercussions of one's depression
(Nolen-Hoeksema, 1991; Nolen-Hoeksema, Wisco & Lyubomirsky, 2008; Smith & Alloy,
2009). Negative rumination has been identified as a significant predictor of depressive
symptoms (Nolen-Hoeksema et al., 2008) episodes (Abela & Hankin, 2011) and also a core
process in the maintenance of depression, notably in studies of adolescents and children (Riso
et al, 2003).
Brain imaging studies have also supported the role of negative rumination in the
maintenance of depression. For example, Hamilton, Furman, Chang, Thomason, Dennis &
Gotlib (2011) observed increased activation of the default mode network, a network
associated with maladaptive, depressive rumination with lower levels of adaptive and
reflective thinking in depressed individuals. The inability of such studies to claim cause and
effect however must be noted.
Nolen-Hoeksema et al., (2008) in their Response Styles Theory (RST), postulate that
this negative rumination preserves and increases depression by enhancing negative thinking,
damaging problem solving, and eroding social support. . Lyubomirsky & Nolen-Hoeksema
(1995) evidenced the damaging effect of rumination on problem solving, finding dysphoric
ruminating individuals generated ineffective solutions to problems. Lyubomirsky, Tucker,
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 9
Caldwell & Berg (1999), additionally found rumination leads people to see obstacles to the
implementation of problem solving solutions. Sustained negative rumination has been
associated with difficulties in regulating emotions (Joormann & Quinn, 2014) and gaining
social support (Nolen-Hoeksema & Davis, 1999). Negative rumination therefore damages the
key components identified as having central importance in promoting resilience by the SAMS
(Johnson et al., 2008), the RAS (Johnson et al., 2010) and Connor & Davidson (2003).
Conversely, therefore, it can be argued that if individuals ruminate positively, thus
enhancing rather than damaging these components, resilience could consequently be
increased. Cross-sectional research has suggested that, just as depressive rumination has an
important impact on depression, positive rumination may also be relevant to promoting high-
quality mental health (Feldman et al., 2008; Hughes, Smith & Alloy 2006) however, one
cannot draw any inferences about cause and effect from such research design. Exploration of
positive rumination, using a similar approach to that illustrated by Nolen-Hoeksema and
colleagues with negative rumination, is essential in order to provide empirical support for its
impact on promoting resilience. With adolescence being characterized by dramatic rises in
depression (Hankin, Abramson, Moffitt, Silva, McGee & Angell) and increased rumination
(Jose & Brown, 2008; Rood, Roelofs, Bégels, Nolen Hoeksema, & Schouten 2009), assessing
the impact of positive rumination on psychological resilience in a student population could
have preventative benefits.
Based on this rationale, the main aim of the present study was to determine whether
positive rumination predicts psychological resilience in a student population. An additional
exploratory hypothesis was to examine which out of key variables namely, positive
rumination, social support, emotional regulation or problem solving, was a stronger predictor
of psychological resilience.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 10
Method
Design
A cross-sectional questionnaire design was utilized for the present study. The
predictor variables were positive rumination, divided into self-focused, emotion focused and
dampening, alongside social support, emotional regulation and problem solving. The outcome
variable was the level of psychological resilience.
Participants
The study aimed to recruit 110 first and second year undergraduate psychology
students from the University of Manchester. The target sample size was based on the guidance
provided by Tabachnick & Fidell, (2007) on what constitutes a sufficient sample size to
produce significant statistical power. They suggest that when observing the impact of
combined and individual variables the number of participants should be more than 108.
Recruitment took place online via SONA (“Sona Systems Ltd.”, 1997) - a recruitment
platform that enables universities to recruit participants and manage research. The study
however only recruited 30 participants, specifically 28 females and 2 males.
Measures
Participants were required to complete the following nine questionnaires online via
SONA (“Sona Systems Ltd.”, 1997).
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 11
The Resilience Appraisals Scale (RAS; Johnson, Gooding, Wood & Tarrier, 2010) is a 12-
item self-report measure of psychological resilience. This scale constitutes three sub-scales
reflecting social support: ‘my family or friends are very supportive of me’, problem solving
ability: ‘I can generally solve problems that occur’ and emotional regulation skills: ‘I can
control my emotions.’ Participants indicate to what extent statements apply to them on a five-
point likert scale ranging from 1 ‘strongly disagree’ to 5 ‘strongly agree’. Overall reliability
for the scale has been reported as (α = .88) and for the three individual sub-scales: social
support (α = .93), emotional regulation (α = .92) and problem solving ability (α = .92)
(Johnson et al., 2010). For this study overall reliability of the RAS was calculated as α= .86
and for three subscales social support α= .83; problem solving α = .76; emotional regulation α
= .85.
The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ; Gross & John, 2003) is a 10-item self-report
measure assessing individuals’ habitual use of two emotional regulation strategies. These
strategies are the sub-scales for this questionnaire, namely cognitive reappraisal e.g., ‘When I
want to feel more positive emotion, I change what I’m thinking about’ and expressive
suppression e.g., ‘I keep my emotions to myself’. Participants respond using a seven point
likert scale ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’. Overall reliability for the
scale has been reported as α=.69, with reliabilities for the reappraisal subscale reported as
α=.79 and expressive suppression sub-scale reported as α= .73 (Gross & John, 2003). In this
study overall reliability for the ERQ was calculated as α= .70.
Social Support Behaviours Scale (SSB-S; Vaux, Riedel & Stewart, 1987) is a 45-item self-
report measure of perceived accessibility of social support from family and friends. The scale
comprises five sub-scales: emotional support e.g., “Would comfort me if I was upset”,
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 12
socializing e.g., “Would chat with me”, practical assistance e.g., “Would give me a ride if I
needed one”, financial assistance e.g., “Would pay for my lunch if I was broke” and
advice/guidance e.g., “Would give me advice about what to do”. Participants were required to
respond to statements on a 5-point likert scale ranging from “no one would do this” to “most
family members/friends would certainly do this”. In a number of student samples strong
reliability was found with the lowest reliability for the sub-scales being α=.82 and the highest
being α=.9 (Vaux et al., 1987). Overall reliability for the scale in this study was calculated as
α=.96
The Responses to Positive Affect Scale (RPA; Feldman, Joorman & Johnson, 2008) is a 17-
item self-report measure containing three sub-scales. The sub scales comprise self-focused
rumination (e.g., “think about how proud you are of yourself”), emotion-focused rumination,
(e.g., “think about how happy you feel”) and finally, dampening (e.g., “remind yourself that
these feelings won’t last”). Participants respond by rating rate each item on a lickert scale
ranging from 1 (almost never respond in this way) to 4 (almost always respond in this way).
Reliability for the dampening sub scale has been reported as α= 0.72, emotional focused
rumination α= 0.69 and self-focused rumination α= 0.71 (Feldman et al., 2008). Reliabilities
for the RPA subscales in this study were calculated as: emotion-focused α=.51, self-focused α
= .71 and dampening α = .85.
The Cassidy-Long Problem-Solving Questionnaire (PS; Cassidy & Long, 1996) is a 24-
item self-report measure of six problem solving styles. The questionnaire consists of six sub-
scales, namely, helplessness: ‘I think only of myself when faced with problems’, problem
solving control: ‘I blame myself for the problems’, creative style: ‘I make a plan of action and
follow it’, problem solving confidence: ‘I make decisions and I am happy with them later’,
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 13
avoidance style: ‘I just wish that things might go away’ and finally approach style: ‘I take
some positive action’. Participants respond according to how much each statement applies to
them using ‘true/false’ options. Reliability of the overall measure has been reported as α=0.8
(Baker 2003). For this study overall reliability for this questionnaire was calculated as α=.85.
The following questionnaires were administered to participants, however not further analyzed
for the purposes of the present study:
The Beck Hopelessness Scale (Beck, Weissman, Lester & Trexler, 1974) is a 20-item self-
report measure of hopelessness. It taps into three major aspects of hopelessness: feelings
about the future, loss of motivation and expectations. Participants respond to statements e.g.,
‘My future seems dark to me’ using ‘true or false’. Each item is subsequently given a score of
0 or 1 accordingly, with some scores are reversed. The sum of all scores is the hopelessness
score, the higher the score the more hopeless they are. Overall reliability for the scale has
been reported as high α= .93 (Beck et al., 1974)
The Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale (CES-D scale; Radloff, 1977) is a
20-item questionnaire measuring depression. Respondents are required to indicate how often
they had felt a certain way in the past week e.g., ‘I was bothered by things that usually don't
bother me.’ They respond on a 4-point lickert scale ranging from ‘rarely or none of the time
(<1 day)’ to ‘most or all of the time (5-7 days)’. Taylor, Doane & Eisenberg, (2013) using a
student sample found high reliabilities ranging from α= .86 to α=.91.
The Hypomanic Personality Scale (HYP; Eckbald & Chapman, 1986) is a 48-item measure
of hypomanic personality designed to identify those at risk for hypomania and mania. It taps
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 14
into 3 aspects of hypomania which are emotion, behaviour, and energy. Respondents indicate
whether statements are ‘true or false’. Reliability for the questionnaire has been reported to be
α=.87 and test-retest over 15 weeks was α= .81 (Eckbald & Chapman, 1986).
The Frequency of Positive Thinking Scale (Sit, 2013) is a nine- item questionnaire that
measures the frequency of positive thinking in one month. It was developed for the purpose
of this study. It comprises the same sub-scales as the RAS (Johnson et al., 2010), namely,
social support: (e.g., ‘I have people who will stick by me in a crunch’), problem solving
ability: (e.g., ‘There are lots of ways to get out of any problem’), and emotional regulation
strategies: (e.g., ‘I control my emotions by changing the way I think about the situation I'm
in’.) However, the individual questions are sampled on the Social Support Behaviour Scale
(Vaux et al., 1987), Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (Gross & John, 2003) and Trait Hope
Scale (Snyder et al., 1991). The phrasing of the questions was modified for the present study
(see Appendix A). Participants responded on a 7-point scale from “No Times” to “More than
Ten Times”, and were given a score ranging from 0 to 6, in respective to the responses given.
A higher score reflects higher frequency of positive thinking. The scale's overall alpha
reliability for this study was calculated as α=.92, and for the three subscales: social support
α=.94 emotion coping α=.84 and problem solving α=.90.
Procedure
Participants signed up online via SONA (“Sona Systems Ltd.”, 1997). Participants
were required to read a participant information sheet that outlined the study. After 24 hours
participants provided informed consent, after which they were able to proceed to the nine
questionnaire measures. The order which the questionnaires were presented to each
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 15
participant was randomized. Students were incentivized to participate and complete all 9
questionnaires within 60 minutes in exchange for four course credits.
Analysis Strategy
Firstly, the normality of all variables will be examined, by observing histograms and
as well numerical methods, specifically, the Shapiro-Wilk test and tests of Skewness and
Kurtosis (Field, 2013). If the outcome variable is not normally distributed, the data will be
transformed via one of the common methods: log transformation, square root transformation,
and reciprocal transformation or reverse score transformation (Field, 2013). Descriptive
statistics will then be generated in order to summarize the data set. Following this,
Correlations will be conducted to determine the relationship between the key predictor
variables and the outcome variable of psychological resilience, using Pearson’s for the
predictors that are parametric and Spearman’s rho for non-parametric variables (Field, 2013).
A multiple regression will then be conducted using the enter method. This will firstly,
examine how much of the total variance in resilience is accounted for by the predictor
variables (combined) and secondly, how much each predictor individually accounts for the
variance in resilience (unique variance). The analyses will be conducted utilizing SPSS
version 20 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL)
Ethics
Ethical approval was granted by ethics committee 3 at the University of Manchester.
Results
Participant characteristics
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 16
A total of 30 participants were recruited for the study, including 27 first year students
and three second year undergraduates. However, Skewness and Kurtosis scores indicated that
the outcome variable was not normally distributed. Skewness reported as -2.16 (SE=.43) and
Kurtosis as 8.18 (SE=.83). This violates the assumptions of multiple regression, as the
outcome variable is required to be normal. Using a histogram, one participant’s scores
(participant 22) was observed to be an outlier on each questionnaire measure (Appendix B1).
Although Field (2013) advocates data transformation, alternatively we removed this
participant and the outcome variable became normal (Appendix B2). Renewed Skewness and
Kurtosis scores for the outcome variable RAS as well as all other variables are illustrated in
Table 1. The final sample was therefore 29 participants, (Mage = 19.17, SD = 1.04). The
sample included twenty-seven females (Mage = 19.15, SD = 1.06) and two males (Mage = 19.5,
SD = .71). The time participants took to complete the questionnaires was varied, ranging from
12-61 minutes (MDuration = 26.03, SD = 13.01).
Descriptive Statistics, Tests of Normality and Zero-order correlations
Descriptive statistics of the key variables analysed in this study, including means,
ranges, standard deviations, 95% confidence intervals and normality tests of Skewness and
Kurtosis are illustrated in Table 1. Convergent results from tests of normality including the
Shapiro-Wilk test and scores of Skewness and Kurtosis indicated that all the variables were
normally distributed apart from social support however importantly the outcome variable is
normally distributed (Field, 2013).
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 17
Table 1. Means, Ranges, Standard deviations, 95% confidence intervals and normality tests of Skewness and Kurtosis for the key variables in this study.
M Range SD 95% CI(Lower)
95% CI(Upper)
Skewness
(SE)
Kurtosis
(SE)Resilience Appraisal Scale
Emotion Focus 2.92 1.8 .45 2.75 3.09 -.54(.43) .45 (.85)
Self- Focus 2.59 2 .62 2.35 2.82 .26(.43) -1.01(.85)
Dampening 1.82 1.88 .58 1.60 2.04 .54(.43) -1.16(.85)
Emotional Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) 43.79 35 6.9 41.17 46.42 -.34 (.43) 1.57 (.85)
Problem Solving (PS) 15.62 16 4.81 13.79 17.45 -.15 (.43) -1.17 (.85)
Social Support Behaviour Scale (SSBS) 271.86 145 34.58 258.71 285.02 -1.73(.43) 2.96 (.85)
Resilience Appraisal Scale (RAS) 12.15 5.5 1.36 11.63 12.66 .02 (.43) -.07(.85)
Note. M=mean, SD=standard deviation, 95% CI= 95% confidence interval and SE= Standard Error.u
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 18
Spearman's rho correlation was run for the non-parametric variable of social support to
determine its relationship with resilience. For parametric variables, emotion focus, self- focus,
dampening, emotional regulation and problem solving Pearson’s r correlation was conducted.
For zero-order correlations see Table 2.
Scores obtained on the emotion focused subscale and self- focus subscale of the RPA
as well as the ERQ and SSBS were not significantly correlated with psychological resilience.
A positive relationship was found between scores on the PS questionnaire and psychological
resilience. The relationship was strong; 56% of the variance in psychological resilience was
accounted for by variations of scores on the PS scale. Additionally, a negative correlation was
found between the dampening subscale of the RPA and psychological resilience. The
relationship was moderate; 24% of the variance in psychological resilience was accounted for
by the variations in scores of dampening.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 19
Table 2. Results of the Zero-order correlations for the key variables in this study.
2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Response to Positive Affect (RPA)
1.Emotion focus .55** .09 .21 .19 -.06 -.09
2.Self-focus -.12 .01 .36 -.06 .13
3.Dampening .01 -.27 -.001 -.40*
4.Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) .08 .27 .24
5.Problem Solving Questionnaire (PS) -.13 .75**
6. Social Support Behaviour Scale (SSBS) .01
7.Resilience Appraisal Scale (RAS)
Note. ***Correlation significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed). **Correlation significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation significant at the 0.05 (2-tailed). RPA= Response to positive affect, ERQ=Emotion regulation Questionnaire, PS = Problem Solving, RAS=Resilience Appraisal Scale, SSBS = Social Support Behaviour Scale. Figures for the Spearman’s rho correlation are bolded and italicised.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 20
Multiple Regression analysis
Multiple regression was run in order to determine the relationship the key predictor
variables: positive rumination divided into self-focused, emotion focused, dampening along
with problem solving, emotional regulation and social support and the outcome variable of
psychological resilience. Although some variables were found to not be correlated with
psychological resilience, in order align with the initial analysis strategy all variables were
included in the regression analysis. The results of the multiple regression analysis are
illustrated in table 3.
The regression model was significant, F(6,22) = 8.99, p =.000. Positive rumination as
measured by the three subscales of the RPA; emotion focus, self-focus and dampening along
with problem solving, emotional regulation and social support accounted for 63% of the total
variance in psychological resilience (adjusted R2). Problem solving predicted psychological
resilience however, emotion focus (RPA) dampening (RPA) self-focus (RPA) emotion
regulation and social support did not.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 21
Table 3. Results of the multiple regression analysis for the key variables in the study.
B SE B 95% [CI] for B β t Sig.
Constant 9.32 1.89 [5.39, 13.24] 4.92 .000
Response to Positive Affect (RPA)
Emotion focus -.68 .44 [-1.59, .23] -.23 -1.54 .138
Self-focus -.05 .32 [-.73, .62] -.02 -.16 .873
Dampening -.43 .29 [-1.01, 1.7] -.18 -1.5 .149
Emotional Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) .04 .03 [-.21, .1] .19 1.31 .203
Problem Solving Questionnaire (PS) .21 .04 [.14, .28] .74 5.82 .000
Social Support Behaviour Scale (SSB-S) .003 .01 [-.01, 0.2] .08 .54 .59
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 22
Discussion
The overarching aim of this study was to examine whether positive rumination would
predict psychological resilience. Research findings illustrated that it did not. However,
correlations did reveal that of the three sub-scales of the RPA, emotion focus and self-focus
were found to have no relationship with resilience, while dampening was found to have a
moderately negative relationship with resilience. The study also addressed an additional aim,
exploring which of the components, namely: positive rumination, problem solving, emotional
regulation and social support, were a stronger predictor of psychological resilience. The
multiple regression analysis illustrated that problem solving was the only predictor of
psychological resilience.
The finding that positive rumination did not predict psychological resilience does not
necessarily support or contradict a recognized body of research, given that positive rumination
is a comparatively under-developed research area. It does, however, contradict the logical
expectation of the effects of positive rumination when set against the known effects of
negative rumination, as identified by Nolen-Hoeksema (1991) in their RST. This confirmed
that negative rumination enhances negative thinking, damages problem solving and erodes
social support (Nolen-Hoeksema, 2008). Logically, it was anticipated that positive rumination
would, conversely, enhance such components and consequently increase resilience. This,
however, was not the case. This finding further undermines cross-sectional research, which
has suggested that, as negative rumination contributes to depression, positive rumination may
have the inverse effect by promoting psychological resilience (Feldman et al., 2008; Hughes
et al., 2006).
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 23
One explanation for this finding could be that, although negative rumination is a
damaging mechanism, positive rumination may not simply have a reverse enhancement effect.
In practice, the underlying mechanisms of these processes may be fundamentally different.
Feldman et al., (2008) state that positive rumination is a more voluntary and active process,
associated with high arousal and internal sensations. By contrast, negative rumination is an
involuntary process (Rime et al., 1994 as cited in; Luminet, Zech, Rime & Wagner, 2000)
implying different underlying functionalities. Future research could investigate the
psychological mechanisms underpinning positive rumination and its relationship with
resilience, additionally with the suggestion that positive rumination is involuntary, research
could induce positive rumination and then assess its mechanisms and impact.
Research has shown that variations exist in individuals’ propensity and ability to
ruminate (Nolen-Hoeksema, Morrow & Fredrickson, 1991; Conway, Csank, Holm & Blake,
2000; Ray et al., 2005). Cross-sectional findings focusing specifically on positive rumination
suggest that it occurs; not only with variable frequency, but that there are also variations
between individual capacity to do so (Luminet et al., 2000). Therefore, our findings could be
accounted for by a lower propensity to engage in positive rumination amongst our student
sample. Future research may benefit from developing a baseline assessment measure to
determine a sample’s capacity to positively ruminate prior to assessing its predictive
relationship with resilience. A similar instrument to that of the Ruminative Responses Scale
of the Response Styles Questionnaire (Nolen-Hoeksema & Morrow, 1991), which assesses
the tendency to negatively ruminate, could be valuable.
The use of the RPA as the only measure of positive rumination must be
acknowledged. With the area being so novel, limited instruments are available to measure
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 24
positive rumination. Although the RPA has been reported to have acceptable reliability and
validity (Feldman et al., 2008), this study would have benefited from using more than one
measure. A supplementary method could have been The Euphoric Rumination Questionnaire
(ERQ; Hughes, Smith & Alloy, 2006; as cited in Hughes, 2009) which has also been
demonstrated to have reliability and validity within a student sample (Hughes et al., 2006).
This is a 25-item, positively modified version of a commonly used measure of negative
rumination, the Ruminative Responses Scale (RRS; Nolen-Hoeksema & Morrow, 1991).
Although the ERQ has been shown to have psychometric weaknesses, it would have allowed
for the convergence of results in relation to positive rumination in this study. Certainly, this
area of research generally would benefit from the development of additional measures
through which positive rumination can be assessed.
Notably, one sub-scale of the RPA, specifically dampening, which is defined as the
tendency to respond to positive moods states with strategies to reduce the intensity and
duration of those states (Feldman et al., 2008), was negatively correlated with psychological
resilience. This negative relationship was expected, as higher scores on the dampening
subscale have been noted in research to be associated with depressive rumination, greater
symptoms of depression, and mania vulnerability (Feldman et al.,2008) and thus, would not
positively correlate with resilience.
The drivers that motivated participants to take part in the study also require
examination. Students were incentivized by the reward of four credits in exchange for their
participation. This may have impacted on their responses, in that they may have been
motivated by extrinsic factors rather than intrinsically motivated by a genuine interest in the
topic area. This is reflected in the duration that participants took to complete the measures
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 25
with some students taking as little as 12 minutes to complete all questionnaire measures. This
could have affected the accuracy of responses, in turn reducing the reliability of the findings
in this study. Future research may benefit from exploring incentives that evoke intrinsic
motivation.
The multiple regression analysis revealed that problem solving was found to be the
only significant predictor of psychological resilience. These findings were in accordance with
Johnson at al., (2008), Johnson et al., (2010) and Connor & Davidson (2003), which all
postulated that problem solving was a key component of resilience. Additionally, it supported
Neiger, (1991), Bernard, (1994) & Rutter (1999) whose research identified the presence of
problem solving as a component of resilience. However, findings that emotional regulation
and social support did not predict psychological resilience are inconsistent with additional,
well- established findings by Johnson et al., (2008), Johnson et al., (2010) and Connor &
Davidson (2003).
A feasible explanation for the lack of relationship found between emotion regulation
and resilience could be that our sample was composed of individuals who were still
developing the ability and propensity to regulate emotions. Garnefski & Kraaij, (2006) found
adolescents reported significantly less cognitive emotion regulation strategies than adults,
suggesting that, although all cognitive strategies used by adults are to some extent also used
by adolescents, the extent of application develops during the transition from adolescence to
adulthood, at which point the abilities become mastered (Aldwin, 1994). With our sample
being composed of first and second year students in the transition into adulthood, arguably
participants could still developing the ability to regulate their emotions.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 26
However, with emotional regulation, social support and problem solving being so well
documented in psychological literature to all contribute to resilience, the inconsistency of the
findings in this study could most probably be attributed to the limited sample of only 29
participants. This low sample size could consequently result in a lack of statistical power.
Therefore, the results of this study may mask a relationship that does actually exist in the
population; this is specifically a type II error.
Beyond the reliance on a small sample size, which may have impacted on results, a
number of additional limitations of this study warrant discussion. The sample was mainly
composed of females (i.e. females comprised 90% of the total sample). This gender imbalance
raises concerns as to whether the present findings can be applicable to the male population.
Secondly, the use of self-report for all eight measures may be considered a limitation, as
individuals may have responded in a socially desirable manner, negating the accuracy of
responses. Despite this, self-report was considered to be the most appropriate method. This
was because the study was concerned with exploring individuals' personal appraisals of their
problem solving strategies, social support, emotional regulation and positive rumination.
Finally, the cross-sectional design of the study is an additional limitation, which confines the
extent to which findings can be interpreted. This is because this study only tested participants’
appraisals on one occasion, limiting the ability to claim causality.
Despite such limitations it must be acknowledged that this is a pioneering area of
research yet to develop and that this study presents a step towards understanding the role of
positive rumination and the components of resilience. Future longitudinal studies on a larger
and more diverse clinical sample, including a balanced number of males and females should
be used to test the findings of the study in order to produce more reliable and generalizable
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 27
conclusions with the potential to inform clinical implications. Moreover, further examination
of the key variables analyzed in this research would add value to this research field generally.
Future research should specifically focus on the development of additional measurements of
positive rumination while also assessing underlying mechanisms involved in the process.
Acknowledgements
I would like to gratefully acknowledge Trish Gooding for her constant support throughout the
duration of the project. Additionally, I would like to thank my family who been a continuous
source of love, care and support throughout my university career.
References
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 28
Abela, J. R., & Hankin, B. L. (2011). Rumination as a vulnerability factor to depression during the
transition from early to middle adolescence: a multiwave longitudinal study. Journal of
abnormal psychology, 120(2), 259.
Armstrong, A. R., Galligan, R. F., & Critchley, C. R. (2011). Emotional intelligence and
psychological resilience to negative life events. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(3),
331-336.
Banyard, V. L., & Cross, C. (2008). Consequences of teen dating violence understanding
intervening variables in ecological context. Violence Against Women, 14(9), 998-1013.
Beck, A. T., Weissman, A., Lester, D., & Trexler, L. (1974). The measurement of pessimism: The
hopelessness scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 861-865
Benard, B. (1995). Fostering Resilience in Children. ERIC Digest
Bond, C. A., L.,Burns, J. M., Vella-Brodrick, D. A., & Sawyer, S. M. (2003). Adolescent
resilience: A concept analysis. Journal of adolescence, 26(1), 1-11.
Brooks, R., & Goldstein, S. (2001). Raising Resilient Children: Fostering Strength, Hope, and
Optimism in Your Child. Contemporary Books, 4255 West Touhy Avenue, Lincolnwood, IL
60712-1975.
Bryant, K. J., Windle, M. E., & West, S. G. (1997). The science of prevention: Methodological
advances from alcohol and substance abuse research. American Psychological Association.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 29
Cassidy, T., & Long, C. (1996). Problem‐solving style, stress and psychological illness:
Development of a multifactorial measure. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 35(2), 265-
277.
Cicchetti, D., & Cohen, D.J. (1995). Perspectives on developmental psychopathology. In D.
Cicchetti & D.J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology, Vol 1: Theory and methods
(pp. 3-17). New York: Wiley., 56(3), 227.
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis.
Psychological bulletin, 98(2), 310.
Connor, K. M. (2006). Assessment of resilience in the aftermath of trauma. Journal of Clinical
Psychiatry, 67(2), 46-49.
Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor‐Davidson resilience scale (CD‐RISC). Depression and anxiety, 18(2), 76-82. Olsson,
Conway, M., Csank, P. A., Holm, S. L., & Blake, C. K. (2000). On assessing individual differences
in rumination on sadness. Journal of personality assessment, 75(3), 404-425.
Counselling Directory. (n.d.). Facts and Figures. Retrieved April 25, 2014 from,
http://www.counselling-directory.org.uk/stats.html
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 30
Davydov, D. M., Stewart, R., Ritchie, K., & Chaudieu, I. (2010). Resilience and mental health.
Clinical Psychology Review, 30(5), 479-495.
Eckblad, M., & Chapman, L. J. (1986). Development and validation of a scale for hypomanic
personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 95(3), 214.
Feldman, G. C., Joormann, J., & Johnson, S. L. (2008). Responses to positive affect: A self-report
measure of rumination and dampening. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 32(4), 507-525.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). Cultivated emotions: parental socialization of positive emotions and
self-conscious emotions. Psychological Inquiry, 9(4), 279-281.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-
build theory of positive emotions. American psychologist, 56(3), 218.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). The value of positive emotions. American scientist, 91(4), 330-335.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Philosophical
Transactions-Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences, 1367-1378.
Fredrickson, B. L., Tugade, M. M., Waugh, C. E., & Larkin, G. R. (2003). What good are positive
emotions in crisis? A prospective study of resilience and emotions following the terrorist
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 31
attacks on the United States on September 11th, 2001. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 84(2), 365.
Garnefski & Kraaij, V. (2006). Relationships between cognitive emotion regulation strategies and
depressive symptoms: A comparative study of five specific samples. Personality and
Individual differences, 40(8), 1659-1669.
Gross, J. J., & John, O, P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes:
Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 85, 348-362
Gross, J. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2007). Emotion regulation: Conceptual foundations. Handbook of
emotion regulation, 3, 24.
Hamilton, J. P., Furman, D. J., Chang, C., Thomason, M. E., Dennis, E., & Gotlib, I. H. (2011).
Default-mode and task-positive network activity in major depressive disorder: implications
for adaptive and maladaptive rumination. Biological psychiatry, 70(4), 327-333.
Hankin, B. L., Abramson, L. Y., Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., McGee, R., & Angell, K. E. (1998).
Development of depression from preadolescence to young adulthood: emerging gender
differences in a 10-year longitudinal study. Journal of abnormal psychology, 107(1), 128.
Heppner, P.P., He, Y., Tsai, C.L., and Lin Y.J., 2008. Problem-solving Appraisal. Encyclopedia of
Counseling, 787-790.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 32
HM Government/DH. (2011). No Health Without Mental Health: A Cross-Government Mental
Health Outcomes Strategy for People of All Ages. Retrieved April 11 2014 from
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213761/
dh_124058.pdf
Holahan, C. J., Moos, R. H., Holahan, C. K., & Brennan, P. L. (1995). Social support, coping, and
depressive symptoms in a late-middle-aged sample of patients reporting cardiac illness.
Health Psychology, 14(2), 152.
Hughes, M. E., Smith, J. S., & Alloy, L. B. (2006, November). The Euphoric Rumination
Questionnaire: A measure of repetitive thinking in positive mood. Poster session presented at
the meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Behaviour Therapy, Chicago, IL.
Hughes, M. E. (2009). Responses to positive affect: An examination of positive rumination and
dampening. Retrieved April 22, 2013, from
http://digital.library.temple.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p245801coll10/id/16993.
.
Johnson, J., Gooding, P., & Tarrier, N. (2008). Suicide risk in schizophrenia: explanatory models
and clinical implications, the Schematic Appraisal Model of Suicide (SAMS). Psychology
and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 81, pp. 55–77
Johnson, J., Gooding, P. A., Wood, A. M., & Tarrier, N. (2010). Resilience as positive coping
appraisals: Testing the schematic appraisals model of suicide (SAMS). Behaviour Research
and Therapy, 48(3), 179-186.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 33
Johnson, J., Wood, A.M., Gooding, P., Taylor, P.J., Tarrier, N. (2011). Resilience to suicidality:
The buffering hypothesis. Clinical Psychology Review 31(4), 563-591.
Joormann, J., & Quinn, M. E. (2014). Cognitive processes and emotion regulation in depression.
Depression and anxiety, 31(4), 308-315.
Jose, P. E., & Brown, I. (2008). When does the gender difference in rumination begin? Gender and
age differences in the use of rumination by adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
37(2), 180-192.
Kobasa, S. C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: an inquiry into hardiness.
Journal of personality and social psychology, 37(1), 1.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1995). Effects of self-focused rumination on negative
thinking and interpersonal problem solving. Journal of personality and social psychology,
69(1), 176.
Lyubomirsky, S., Tucker, K. L., Caldwell, N. D., & Berg, K. (1999). Why ruminators are poor
problem solvers: clues from the phenomenology of dysphoric rumination. Journal of
personality and social psychology, 77(5), 1041.
Luminet, O., Zech, E., Rimé, B., & Wagner, H. (2000). Predicting cognitive and social
consequences of emotional episodes: The contribution of emotional intensity, the five factor
model, and alexithymia. Journal of Research in Personality, 34(4), 471-497.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 34
Manyena, S. B. (2006). The concept of resilience revisited. Disasters, 30(4), 434-450.
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American
psychologist
Masten, A. S., & Reed, M. G. J. (2002). Resilience in development. Handbook of positive
psychology, 74-88.
Min, J.A.,Yu, J. J., Lee, C. U., & Chae J.H. (2013).“Cognitive emotion regulation strategies
contributing to resilience in patients with depression and/or anxiety disorders,”
Comprehensive Psychiatry,vol. 54, no. 8, pp. 1190–1197.
Neiger, B. (1991). Resilient reintegration: Use of structural equations modeling (Doctoral
dissertation, Department of Health Education, University of Utah)
Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1991). Responses to depression and their effects on the duration of
depressive episodes. Journal of abnormal psychology, 100(4), 569.
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Davis, C. G. (1999). " Thanks for sharing that": ruminators and their social
support networks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(4), 801.
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Morrow, J. (1991). A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic
stress symptoms after a natural disaster: the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. Journal of
personality and social psychology, 61(1), 115.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 35
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Wisco, B. E., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). Rethinking rumination.
Perspectives on psychological science, 3(5), 400-424.
Ong, A. D., Bergeman, C. S., Bisconti, T. L., & Wallace, K. A. (2006). Psychological resilience,
positive emotions, and successful adaptation to stress in later life. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 91(4), 730.
Ong, A. D., Zautra, A. J., & Reid, M. C. (2010). Psychological resilience predicts decreases in pain
catastrophizing through positive emotions. Psychology and aging, 25(3), 516.
Ozbay, F., Johnson, D. C., Dimoulas, E., Morgan III, C. A., Charney, D., & Southwick, S. (2007).
Social support and resilience to stress: from neurobiology to clinical practice. Psychiatry
(Edgmont), 4(5), 35.
Patel, V., & Goodman, A. (2007). Researching protective and promotive factors in mental health.
International journal of epidemiology, 36(4), 703-707.
Peng, S. S. (1994). Understanding resilient students: The use of national longitudinal databases.
Peng, L., Li, M., Zuo, X., Miao, Y., Chen, L., Yu, Y., ... & Wang, T. (2014). Application of the
Pennsylvania resilience training program on medical students. Personality and Individual
Differences.
Pinquart, M. (2009). Moderating effects of dispositional resilience on associations between hassles
and psychological distress. Journal of applied Developmental psychology, 30(1), 53-60.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 36
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general
population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401
Radloff, L. S., & Locke, B. Z. (1986). The community mental health assessment survey and the
CES-D scale. Community surveys of psychiatric disorders, 4, 177-88.
Ray, R. D., Ochsner, K. N., Cooper, J. C., Robertson, E. R., Gabrieli, J. D., & Gross, J. J. (2005).
Individual differences in trait rumination and the neural systems supporting cognitive
reappraisal. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5(2), 156-168.
Rew, L., & Horner, S. D. (2003). Youth resilience framework for reducing health-risk behaviors in
adolescents. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 18(6), 379-388.
Rime´, B., Philippot, P., Finkenauer, C., Legast, S., Moorkens, P., & Tornqvist, J. (1994).
Rumination and social sharing in current life emotion. Unpublished manuscript, University of
Louvain at Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Riso, L. P., Du Toit, P. L., Blandino, J. A., Penna, S., Dacey, S., Duin, J. S., ... & Ulmer, C. S.
(2003). Cognitive aspects of chronic depression. Journal of abnormal Psychology, 112(1), 72.
Rood, L. Roelofs, l., Bégels, S., Nolen—Hoeksema, S., 8: Schouten, E.(2009). The influence of
emotion—focused rumination and distraction on depressive symptoms in non—clinical
youth: A meta—analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 29, 607-16.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 37
Roy, A., Carli, V., & Sarchiapone, M. (2011). Resilience mitigates the suicide risk associated with
childhood trauma. Journal of affective disorders, 133(3), 591-594.
Rutter, M. (1984). Resilient children. Psychology today, 18(3), 57-65.
Rutter, M. (1999). Resilience concepts and findings: implications for family therapy. Journal of
family therapy, 21(2), 119-144.
Schmitz, T. W., De Rosa, E., & Anderson, A. K. (2009). Opposing influences of affective state
valence on visual cortical encoding. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(22), 7199-7207.
Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction (Vol. 55,
No. 1, p. 5). American Psychological Association.
Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress:
empirical validation of interventions. American psychologist, 60(5), 410.
Sit. K.F.K (2013) The Frequency of Positive Thinking Scale. (Resilience and positive rumination).
Unpublished raw questionnaire.
Smith, J. M., & Alloy, L. B. (2009). A roadmap to rumination: A review of the definition,
assessment, and conceptualization of this multifaceted construct. Clinical Psychology Review,
29(2), 116-128.
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 38
Sona Systems Ltd. (1997). Retrieved November 20, 2013, from http://manchester-psych.sona-
systems.com.
Tabachnick, B. Fidell (2007). Using multivariate statistics, 5.
Talarico, J. M., LaBar, K. S., & Rubin, D. C. (2004). Emotional intensity predicts autobiographical
memory experience. Memory & Cognition, 32(7), 1118-1132.
Tarrier, N. (2010). Broad minded affective coping (BMAC): A “positive” CBT approach to
facilitating positive emotions. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 3(1), 64-76.
Vaux, A., Riedel, S., & Stewart, D. (1987). Modes of social support: The social support behaviors
(SS-B) scale. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 209-237
Ystgaard, M., Arensman, E., Hawton, K., Madge, N., van Heeringen, K., Hewitt, A., ... & Fekete,
S. (2009). Deliberate self-harm in adolescents: comparison between those who receive help
following self-harm and those who do not. Journal of adolescence, 32(4), 875-891
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 39
Appendix A
The Frequency of Positive Thinking Scale (Sit, 2013)
DOES POSITIVE RUMINATION PREDICT RESILIENCE? 40
Appendix B1
Appendix B2