Positive and negative mood related activities and their effectiveness in alleviating depressed mood

Abstract

Abstract The first aim of this study was to generate a Pleasant Events Schadule (PES) in a Turkish university sample. This schedule was generated by asking 100 students, who were from different faculties of METU, to write down the activities that they find pleasurable and entertaining. The second aim of this study was to differentiate Positive Mood (PM) and Negative Mood (NM) related activities from the PES. For this purpose 24 students, receiving the highest scores from the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), of METU dormitories were asked to monitor the PES for 2-weeks and each day to rate their PM and NM. From the obtained data each items' correlations with PM and NM ratings were calculated seperately for 24 subjects. Results revealed that if an activity was negatively correlated with NM, it was usually also positively correlated with PM. So PM and NM related activities could not be differentiated. Also unexpectedly there was a significant negative correlation between PM and NM. Thus, mood related form of PES (MRPES) was constructed from activities which had a significant correlation either with PM or NM, or with both, at least for two subjects. Before and after the monitoring, from these 24 monitoring group subjects and from other 12 subjects, who constructed the waiting list control (WLC) group, BDI, PM, and NM assessments were obtained. 2 (group) X 2 (time) repeated measure ANOVA calculated with these measures revealed no significant effect ofmonitoring on these measures. The final and the main aim of this study was to investigate differential effectiveness of `assigning an increase in engage ment in general mood related pleasant activities` versus `assigning an increase in these activities by giving special emphasis on individually specific mood related activities`, on the levels of depression, mood (positive and negative), and anxiety (state and trait). For that purpose monitoring group subjects, who were randomly assigned either to specified mood related activities (SMRA) group or to unspecified mood related activities (UMRA) group, and same WLC group subjects were used. SMRA group received MRPES with their individually specific five activities being underlined and this groups' members were asked to engage in these activities by giving special emphasis on underlined five activities; UMRA group received MRPES without any underlining and were only asked to engage in these activities as much as they can; and WLC group served as a control for any therapeutic effects resulting from assessment procedures and time. This activity increase (intervention) period lasted for two weeks. Pre- and post-intervention assessments, and 40 days after the post-intervention follow-up assessments were obtained by giving BD I, PM, NM, and STA I to the subjects. 3 (group) X 3 (time) repeated measure ANOVAs for these measures revealed significant interaction effect for both BDI and state anxiety measures. These results showed that although there were no group differences at the pre- intervention phase, the UMRA group'sdepression and state anxiety levels were significantly lower than the other groups* at the post-intervention period, but this effect was transitory since at the follow-up there were again no group differences for both measures. Both SMRA group and WLC group did not show any significant change throughout the intervention and follow-up periods. The results suggested that even though the UMRA group were not given their specific activities they also selectively increased only these activities. Furthermore, assigning specific activities seem to have suppressed thearapeutic effects for the SMRA group. These results were discussed in relation to conceptual difficulties in defining PM and NM, and possible reasons for the disadvantage exhibited by the SMRA group and the transience of therapeutic effects for the UMRA group. Implications and suggestions for future research were offered.

Abstract The first aim of this study was to generate a Pleasant Events Schadule (PES) in a Turkish university sample. This schedule was generated by asking 100 students, who were from different faculties of METU, to write down the activities that they find pleasurable and entertaining. The second aim of this study was to differentiate Positive Mood (PM) and Negative Mood (NM) related activities from the PES. For this purpose 24 students, receiving the highest scores from the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), of METU dormitories were asked to monitor the PES for 2-weeks and each day to rate their PM and NM. From the obtained data each items' correlations with PM and NM ratings were calculated seperately for 24 subjects. Results revealed that if an activity was negatively correlated with NM, it was usually also positively correlated with PM. So PM and NM related activities could not be differentiated. Also unexpectedly there was a significant negative correlation between PM and NM. Thus, mood related form of PES (MRPES) was constructed from activities which had a significant correlation either with PM or NM, or with both, at least for two subjects. Before and after the monitoring, from these 24 monitoring group subjects and from other 12 subjects, who constructed the waiting list control (WLC) group, BDI, PM, and NM assessments were obtained. 2 (group) X 2 (time) repeated measure ANOVA calculated with these measures revealed no significant effect ofmonitoring on these measures. The final and the main aim of this study was to investigate differential effectiveness of `assigning an increase in engage ment in general mood related pleasant activities` versus `assigning an increase in these activities by giving special emphasis on individually specific mood related activities`, on the levels of depression, mood (positive and negative), and anxiety (state and trait). For that purpose monitoring group subjects, who were randomly assigned either to specified mood related activities (SMRA) group or to unspecified mood related activities (UMRA) group, and same WLC group subjects were used. SMRA group received MRPES with their individually specific five activities being underlined and this groups' members were asked to engage in these activities by giving special emphasis on underlined five activities; UMRA group received MRPES without any underlining and were only asked to engage in these activities as much as they can; and WLC group served as a control for any therapeutic effects resulting from assessment procedures and time. This activity increase (intervention) period lasted for two weeks. Pre- and post-intervention assessments, and 40 days after the post-intervention follow-up assessments were obtained by giving BD I, PM, NM, and STA I to the subjects. 3 (group) X 3 (time) repeated measure ANOVAs for these measures revealed significant interaction effect for both BDI and state anxiety measures. These results showed that although there were no group differences at the pre- intervention phase, the UMRA group'sdepression and state anxiety levels were significantly lower than the other groups* at the post-intervention period, but this effect was transitory since at the follow-up there were again no group differences for both measures. Both SMRA group and WLC group did not show any significant change throughout the intervention and follow-up periods. The results suggested that even though the UMRA group were not given their specific activities they also selectively increased only these activities. Furthermore, assigning specific activities seem to have suppressed thearapeutic effects for the SMRA group. These results were discussed in relation to conceptual difficulties in defining PM and NM, and possible reasons for the disadvantage exhibited by the SMRA group and the transience of therapeutic effects for the UMRA group. Implications and suggestions for future research were offered.