Depression is well known to share a negative cross-sectional relationship with personality constructs defined by positive emotion (positive affect, extraversion, behavioral activation). These Positive Emotionality (PE) constructs have been proposed to represent stable temperamental risk factors for depression, not merely current mood state. These constructs have also been proposed to increase risk specifically for depression, relative to anxiety. We performed a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies to examine the relationship of PE to depression (59 effect sizes) and anxiety (26 effect sizes). In cross-sectional analyses, PE constructs were negatively associated with depression (r = −.34) and anxiety (r = −.24). PE constructs also prospectively predicted depression (r = −.26) and anxiety (r = −.19). These relationships remained statistically significant, but were markedly attenuated, when baseline levels of depression (β = −.08) and anxiety (β = −.06) were controlled. Moreover, depression and anxiety were equally strong predictors of subsequent changes in PE (β = −.07 and −.09, respectively). These findings are consistent with theoretical accounts of low PE as a temperamental vulnerability for depression, but suggest that the prospective relationship of PE to depression may be weaker and less specific than previously assumed.

Depressed individuals are less reactive than healthy individuals to positive stimuli in the laboratory, but accumulating evidence suggests that they are more emotionally reactive to positive events in their daily lives. The present study probed the boundaries of this curious "mood brightening" effect and investigated its specificity to major depressive disorder (MDD) vis-à-vis generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), its closest boundary condition. We used ecological momentary assessment to measure reactions to positive events over one week in individuals with MDD (n = 38), GAD (n = 36), comorbid MDD-GAD (n = 38), and no psychopathology (n = 33). Depressed individuals responded to positive events with larger changes in affect, cognition, reported withdrawal (but not approach) behavior, and symptoms than healthy controls. More severe depression assessed before the sampling week predicted greater brightening. Altered reactivity to positive events was relatively specific to MDD when compared with GAD, similar to patterns found for other positive emotional processes. The robustness, scope, and relative specificity of the brightening effect highlights the need to resolve conflicting findings across laboratory and non-laboratory studies to advance understanding of altered reactivity in emotional disorders.

We present the Positive Valence Systems Scale (PVSS), a measure of the National Institute of Mental Health’s Research Domain Criteria Positive Valence Systems domain. An initial long form of the scale (45 items) providing a broad assessment of the domain was distilled into a short form (21 items) measuring responses to a wide range of rewards (Food, Physical Touch, Outdoors, Positive Feedback, Social Interactions, Hobbies, and Goals). Across three diverse samples, the PVSS-21 demonstrated strong internal consistency, retest reliability, and factorial validity. It was more strongly related to reward than punishment sensitivity, positive than negative affect, and depression than anxiety. PVSS-21 scores discriminated depressed from nondepressed individuals and predicted anhedonia severity even when controlling for depression status. Hobbies emerged as the strongest predictor of clinical outcomes and the best differentiator of depressed and nondepressed individuals. Results highlight the potential of the PVSS for advancing understanding of reward-related abnormalities in depression and other disorders.

Two core features of depression include depressed mood (heightened distress) and anhedonia (reduced pleasure). Despite their centrality to depression, studies have not examined their contribution to treatment outcomes in a randomized clinical trial providing mainstream treatments like antidepressant medications (ADM) and cognitive therapy (CT). We used baseline distress and anhedonia derived from a factor analysis of the Mood and Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire to predict remission and recovery in 433 individuals with recurrent/chronic major depressive disorder. Patients were provided with only ADM or both ADM and CT. Overall, higher baseline distress and anhedonia predicted longer times to remission within one year and recovery within three years. When controlling for treatment condition, distress improved prediction of outcomes over and above anhedonia, while anhedonia did not improve prediction of outcomes over and above distress. Interactions with treatment condition demonstrated that individuals with higher distress and anhedonia benefited from receiving CT in addition to ADM, whereas there was no added benefit of CT for individuals with lower distress and anhedonia. Assessing distress and anhedonia prior to treatment may help select patients who will benefit most from CT in addition to ADM. For the treatments and outcome measures tested, utilizing distress to guide treatment planning may yield the greatest benefit.

No abstract