Attributions and accessibility of explanations for future events in anxiety and depression

Objectives. The research examined qualitative and quantitative aspects of future thinking in mood-disturbed participants. Design. A cross-sectional, mixed design compared three groups of participants on measures of future thinking using an adapted fluency paradigm. Methods. Participants who were either anxious (N = 25), anxious and depressed (mixed; N = 25), or neither anxious nor depressed (control; N = 25) were presented with a range of future positive and negative events and asked to provide explanations as to why those events would (pro reasons) or would not (con reasons) happen to them. Number of reasons given of each type was measured. The reasons were further analysed in terms of a number of attributional dimensions. Results. Mood-disturbed participants (anxious and mixed) provided more pro relative to con reasons for negative events and more con relative to pro reasons for positive events. Compared to the control group, mood-disturbed participants also provided more internal and more global reasons for why negative events would happen and for why positive events would not happen. Conclusion. Mood-disturbed participants differ from controls on qualitative as well as quantitative aspects of future thinking.