ERQ marking: Cognitive etiologies
Below you will find a sample ERQ for the question: Discuss a cognitive approach to one aetiology of abnormal behaviour.
When marking the sample, refer to the rubric to award marks. After the sample, there is a predicted grade as well as feedback on the strengths and limitations of the response.
ERQ Sample 1
Rumination is when one continuously thinks back, over a fairly long period of time, to an event that happened in the past, this event usually being negative. It is common that one might distort the said event in their mind such as maximizing it, meaning they blow up all the details of the event and over analyse small actions, constantly thinking of how they either messed up or could have done certain things better. Rumination is a cognitive factor in the aetiology of depression. There is a bidirectional ambiguity aspect within this factor as rumination and thus negative thoughts might aide in causing depression but it could be the opposite with depression causing rumination and negative thoughts. Although the theory of rumination is a cognitive factor, it can be supported through a biological lense as well, this can be seen in the study done by Farb et al. One of the original studies done on this topic by Nolen-Hoeksema showed that the amount of rumination one might be doing constantly predicts the beginning of depression.
This study was conducted in order to support the rumination theory through the lens of biology in addition to cognitive. Farb et al’s study had a total of 32 participants, 16 of them being formerly depressed patients and the other 16 being the control group. Participants were shown sad and neutral movie clips while their brain activity was being tracked using an fMRI. Formerly depressed patients had the severity of their depression evaluated. All the participants were given a questionnaire that inquired about the adaptive and maladaptive cognitive modes in the face of emotional challenges. In order to gather results, Farb et al looked at the correlations between the brain’s responses to the sad movies compared to the neutral movies after the scanning as well as the follow-up period of 18 -months The researchers predicted relapse would be shown in the prefrontal cortex. This was supported by the results as ten of the total 16 participants relapsed into depression during the 18-month period that followed the experiment.
Through this study, the cognitive factor of rumination was supported by biological aspects. Rumination can be seen as either a cause or effect of depression thus always going back to the origins of the disorder. The study also showed how it was more commonly seen that the re-lapsing participants showed more activity in the area of the brain linked with rumination while the control participants had more activity in the visual cortex. This clearly supports how depression might affect the brain or be affected by the act of rumination.
The study of Nolen-Hoeksema (2000) consisted of interviewing participants that included both men and women that had lost a loved one. The researcher found that participants who ruminate more after the death were more likely to become more deeply depressed compared to the participants who would ruminate less. This meant that the study resulted in showing that the amount of rumination one might be doing predicts the beginning of depression as well as the severity and duration of it. In non-depressed people, it is seen that women ruminate more in general but in depressed participants, there was found to be not much difference between the two sexes when comparing cases of similar severities.
The bidirectional ambiguity factor continues to live on each time this factor is studied which creates a strong relationship between the aetiology of depression and the cognitive factor of rumination, even if researchers do not know for sure which is the cause and which is the effect.
591 words
Focus: The response is not focused on the demands of the command term. 1 mark.
Knowledge and understanding: Demonstrates a limited understanding of the origin of depression; the link between rumination and depression is not explicit. Terminology is generally correctly applied. 3 marks.
Use of research: The first study is not used to high effect. The second study is not well explained. 3 marks.
Critical thinking: There is little to no evidence of critical thinking. 1 mark.
Clarity and organization: The introduction is not clearly developed. Topic sentences are not clear in the development of the argument. The organization could be improved. It would have been better to discuss the original research before the biological support for that research. The conclusion is not clear. 1 mark
Total marks: 9 marks
IB Predicted: 4
ERQ Sample 2
Depression is one of the most common disorders, yet it has a wide range of factors influencing the etiology and symptoms of the disorder. Understanding the etiology behind depression can help treat it, and one aspect of the etiology of depression is the cognitive factors. According to Beck’s theory, depression is rooted in a patient's schema. How they interpret, react, and think about life causes depression. Beck’s theory outlines three components: The negative triad - negative views of the self, the world and the future; dysfunctional beliefs; And cognitive biases. Although this theory is not completely robust and cannot explain some elements of depression such as biological factors in hippocampus size changes or how culture can affect depression, there is significant support for these cognitive factors. Supported by real-world applications, and studies such as Alloy et al (1999) and Ruiz-Caballero & Gonzalez (1994), cognitive factors play a significant role in the etiology of depression.
One weakness of Beck’s cognitive theory is that there is bidirectional ambiguity of whether cognitive factors are the cause (etiology) of depression, or if they are simply a symptom of depression. This is further compounded by the nature of cognitive processes - they are difficult to consistently and ethically manipulate. True experiments that can identify cause and effect are difficult to conduct, and thus most studies are correlational. However, one way to alleviate the weakness of bidirectional ambiguity is through prospective studies. One example is Alloy et al (1999). The researchers aimed to find whether one’s thinking patterns could be used to predict the onset of depression. They took a randomly selected sample of young Americans and gave them a number of tests such as the Cognitive Style Questionnaire. The participants were sorted into “positive cognitive group” or “negative cognitive group”, and were followed for 6 years. The results showed that 1% of the positive cognitive group had developed depression compared to 17% in the negative thinking group. Although Alloy et al’s study is still correlational, by using a sample of non-depressed patients they can support the theory that cognitive factors are not a result of depression, but rather correlated to the development of depression. This also gives support that cognitive factors can be predictive of the onset of depression. In addition, because it is prospective it eliminates researcher bias. Because of the use of data triangulation with the different cognitive tests, and the fact that the researchers manually sorted participants into different groups, normally that would be subjected to researcher bias. However, because the researchers sort them into groups prior to knowing whether they become depressed, they cannot change grouping to skew results. In addition, the study has high ecological validity, as the participants lived as they typically would. It is possible that this study has construct validity issues. The participants that “developed depression” are the ones that have been diagnosed. It is possible that participants in the “positive cognitive group” get depressed just as often, but because of their cognitive patterns, they may be affected by the optimism bias or otherwise which prevents them from believing they are depressed and thus not getting diagnosed. Alloy et al’s research provides support that cognitive factors play a significant role in the etiology of depression.
Ruiz-Caballero & Gonzalez (1994) study aimed to find whether depressed patients had different memory patterns. By Beck’s schema theory depressed patients have a negative schema, and because schema affects memory patients should remember negative things better as it aligns with existing schema. Ruiz-Caballero & Gonzalez used a sample of depressed and non-depressed college students. They gave the participants a word-stem completion task to see if participants had a bias for words with a positive or negative connotation. Results indicated that depressed participants had a bias towards negative words, aligning with Beck’s cognitive theory. The study has high internal validity, as there were no confounding variables and the process all participants went through was standardized. However, this study also has low ecological validity. Interpretation and memorisation of isolated words are too simple and may not accurately reflect the encoding and memory of negative/positive events in life that significantly impact a patient's depression. This study also does not directly support that cognitive factors are the cause of depression rather than the symptom, as the participants are already depressed before the study began. This study provides strong evidence for the proof of cognitive factors and changes in depression but does not provide any support that cognitive patterns play a role in the development of depression.
Beck has developed “cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT)” based on this theory, which has been effective at treating patients, supporting the theory. Although there is the Treatment Aetiology Fallacy, and CBT being successful in treatment does not directly mean that Beck’s theory has correctly identified the causes of depression, it has a real-world application and thus the theory is more robust. Like all cognitive theories, due to the intangibility and quantitative measurements for cognitive processes, it is more difficult to test or manipulate, making it more difficult to ascertain the role that cognitive factors may play in the etiology of depression.
There is strong support that cognitive factors play a role in the etiology of depression. However, large amounts of evidence suggest that cognitive factors are not the sole cause of depression - there is too much evidence in support of the biological and sociocultural theories, and they can explain aspects of depression such as the role of genetics or rates of depression seen between different socioeconomic classes. There are also other cognitive theories and factors that have not been explored in this essay, such as rumination, which can explain differences in depression between gender and has biological support. Holistically, cognitive factors play a significant role in the etiology of depression.
962 words
Focus: The essay is well focused on the demands of the question, although one study is incorrectly identified in the introduction. 2 marks.
Knowledge and understanding: Overall, a good understanding of the theory and concepts relevant to the question. Strong use of psychological terminology. 5 marks.
Use of research: The research is appropriate and well explained in the context of the question. 6 marks.
Critical thinking: Some ideas are not supported - e.g. because it is prospective, it eliminates researcher bias or that there were no confounding variables in the second study. But overall, very good critical thinking and a strong discussion. 5 marks.
Clarity and organization: The response is clearly written and well organized. 2 marks.
Total marks: 20 marks
IB Predicted: 7
ERQ Sample 3
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a diagnosis that is commonly done to people who have been showing depressive thoughts such as suicide and moods for at least a duration of 2 weeks. MDD can be recognised also when the disorder interferes with the normal life activities of the person. These negative feelings of worthlessness and loss of interest in activities are usually accompanied by irregular sleeping and eating patterns. These are all symptoms that are examples of the ABC’S (Affective, Behavioural, Cognitive, and Somatic symptoms). As there are many cognitive aspects of this disorder, there are also theories that try to explain these negative symptoms (ABC’S). Affective symptoms such as feelings of sadness, Behavioural symptoms such as passiveness, Cognitive symptoms such as general negative views, Somatic symptoms such as irregular sleeping patterns). However, the most supported theory of cognitive factors, such as one's reasoning, beliefs and thoughts, that outlines the causes of depression is that of Beck’s theory. Beck argued that people have what is called ‘automatic thoughts’, which are negative schemas about oneself, like worthlessness and loss. Therefore, Beck suggested that there is a causal relationship between automatic thoughts and depression. There are three components to Beck’s theory. ‘The Cognitive Triad’, where one may have negative thoughts of the world, negative thoughts of himself and/or negative thoughts of the future. The second component of Beck’s theory is having a negative schema that may have been triggered by a childhood traumatic experience. The last element of Beck’s theory implies that one has cognitive biases, in other words, negative beliefs that lead to ‘Faulty thinking’ like exaggeration and personalisation. The concept that depressive behaviour is linked to faulty thinking is backed up by research.
Alloy et al, for example, wanted to show how negative cognitive patterns influence the trigger of depression. They carried out a longitudinal study, with the participants being healthy American college students, who were split into two groups based on whether they had a high risk of negative cognitive biases (high-risk group) or low risk of negative cognitive biases (low-risk group). This was done with the help of questionnaires. This was also a prospective study as they were tested at the beginning of the study and then were followed for 6 years after that, through self-report questionnaires and interviews. Findings showed that 17% of people in the ‘high risk’ group had developed MDD in contrast to the ‘low risk’ group, where only 1% of people had developed depression. A strength to this study is the fact that it was a prospective study, meaning that participants were observed in the beginning as well, which is crucial, as there is something to compare the findings of the end of the study with. Another strength is the use of several data collecting methods, both interviews and self-reported questionnaires, in order to get a deeper understanding of each participant. Although the study backs up Beck’s theory of faulty thinking, it does have limitations. Several data collecting techniques were used, however, one can not entirely rely on self-reported data as the data may be inaccurate due to social desirability effect. There is also the limitation of Treatment Aetiology Fallacy, which is a fallacy that explains that just because the treatment was successful does not mean that the cause of the disorder was identified.
A study that shows that people with MDD are likely to show negative attention biases is that carried out by Caseras et al. They carried out a study where participants were shown a series of pictures in pairs, with one being a ‘negative’ picture and the other being either ‘positive’ or ‘neutral’. These pictures were shown for 3 seconds only, whilst researchers observed the participants using eye-tracking technology. Researchers were looking for biases in initial orienting, in other words, which picture did the participants first gravitate towards. Secondly, researchers were looking for how long the participants looked at the pictures, in other words, the maintenance of attention. When analysing the data, Alloy et al decided to split the participants based on their findings into two groups - participants who showed depressive symptoms and participants who did not show depressive symptoms. Findings were that participants in the ‘showed depressive symptoms group’ showed a pattern of negative cognitive bias, as they gazed longer at the negative pictures (maintenance of attention) than the positive and neutral ones. However, there were no significant biases that were found in the initial orienting of the participants. Though there were no findings in the initial orienting of participants, there was a pattern that was found in the maintenance of attention. This is supported by Beck’s theory, as people with more negative thoughts are drawn to observing and thinking about the negative views of the world. However, that’s also a limitation, as the study does not show that participants were depressed. In order for a person to be depressed, one has to be in that state of mind for at least 2 weeks in order for it to be considered depression. Three seconds is not enough to label or diagnose the participants as depressed.
To conclude, it is not possible to entirely agree with the statement that automatic thinking leads to depression, as we do not know whether negative thinking is the reason for depression or if depression leads to negative thinking. Since I was looking at cognitive based studies, it is still hard to carry out a study that eliminates all biological and sociocultural factors. However, Beck’s cognitive theory is applicable and has been used to help us understand to some degree the difference of thinking between depressed and non-depressed people. Beck’s theory of self-schemas has been applied to better understand depression as well. A strength of cognitive studies is that MDD is testable especially through longitudinal and prospective studies where people are observed for a long period of time. Method triangulation, which shows various ways of getting similar results is also a reliable data collecting technique. Alloy et al and Caseras et al both are either longitudinal or use multiple data collecting ways to get a result which support Beck’s theory.
1022 words
Focus: The response is generally focused on the question, but could be more focused on the command term. 1 mark.
Knowledge and understanding: There is generally good understanding of the cognitive theories. 5 marks.
Use of research: Studies are well described and linked to the approach. 5 marks.
Critical thinking: Some ideas are not well linked to the research - e.g. the Treatment Aetiology Fallacy for Alloy’s study. Some of the comments in the conclusion are not supported. 3 marks.
Clarity and organization: The introduction could be more clearly organized. Otherwise, well organized. 1 mark.
Total marks: 15 marks
IB Predicted: 6