Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) posits that individual differences in reward and punishment processing predict differences in cognition, behavior, and psychopathology. We performed a quantitative review of the relationships between reinforcement sensitivity, depression and anxiety, in two separate sets of analyses. First, we reviewed 204 studies that reported either correlations between reinforcement sensitivity and self-reported symptom severity or differences in reinforcement sensitivity between diagnosed and healthy participants, yielding 483 effect sizes. Both depression (Hedges' g = .99) and anxiety (g = 1.21) were found to be high on punishment sensitivity. Reward sensitivity negatively predicted only depressive disorders (g =-.21). More severe clinical states (e.g., acute vs remission) predicted larger effect sizes for depression but not anxiety. Next, we reviewed an additional 39 studies that reported correlations between reinforcement sensitivity and both depression and anxiety, yielding 156 effect sizes. We then performed meta-analytic structural equation modeling to simultaneously estimate all covariances and control for comorbidity. Again we found punishment sensitivity to predict depression (β = .37) and anxiety (β = .35), with reward sensitivity only predicting depression (β =-.07). The transdiagnostic role of punishment sensitivity and the discriminatory role of reward sensitivity support a hierarchical approach to RST and psychopathology. Highlights: Sensitivity to punishment positively predicts both depression and anxiety. Sensitivity to reward discriminates between them, negatively predicting depression. This pattern was observed even when directly controlling for comorbidity. Depression's effect sizes are uniquely sensitive to clinical state. Depression's effect sizes are also moderated by method of clinical assessment.

Bipolar spectrum disorders are characterized by alternating intervals of extreme positive and negative affect. We performed a meta-analysis to test the hypothesis that such disorders would be related to dysregulated reinforcement sensitivity. First, we reviewed 23 studies that reported the correlation between self-report measures of (hypo)manic personality and measures of reinforcement sensitivity. A large relationship was found between (hypo)manic personality and BAS sensitivity (g = .74), but not with BIS sensitivity (g =-.08). This stands in contrast to self-reported depression which has a small, negative relationship with BAS sensitivity and a large positive one with BIS sensitivity (Katz et al., 2020). Next, we reviewed 33 studies that compared reinforcement sensitivity between euthymic, bipolar participants and healthy controls. There, bipolar disorder had a small, positive relationship with BAS sensitivity (g = .20) and a medium, positive relationship with BIS sensitivity (g = .64). These findings support a dual-system theory of bipolar disorders, wherein BAS sensitivity is more closely related to mania and BIS sensitivity more closely to bipolar depression. Bipolar disorders show diatheses for both states with euthymic participants being BAS-and BIS-hypersensitive. Implications for further theory and research practice are expounded upon in the discussion. Highlights: Mania is positively associated with BAS sensitivity. Conversely, bipolar depression is positively associated with BIS sensitivity. Both risk factors are present in euthymic bipolar disorder. BAS sensitivity is strongly associated with self-reported nonclinical (hypo)manic severity. Findings support a dual-system approach to bipolar disorders.

Bipolar spectrum disorders are characterized by alternating intervals of extreme positive and negative affect. We performed a meta-analysis to test the hypothesis that such disorders would be related to dysregulated reinforcement sensitivity. First, we reviewed 23 studies that reported the correlation between self-report measures of (hypo)manic personality and measures of reinforcement sensitivity. A large relationship was found between (hypo)manic personality and BAS sensitivity (g = .74), but not with BIS sensitivity (g = -.08). This stands in contrast to self-reported depression which has a small, negative relationship with BAS sensitivity and a large positive one with BIS sensitivity (Katz et al., 2020). Next, we reviewed 33 studies that compared reinforcement sensitivity between euthymic, bipolar participants and healthy controls. There, bipolar disorder had a small, positive relationship with BAS sensitivity (g = .20) and a medium, positive relationship with BIS sensitivity (g = .64). These findings support a dual-system theory of bipolar disorders, wherein BAS sensitivity is more closely related to mania and BIS sensitivity more closely to bipolar depression. Bipolar disorders show diatheses for both states with euthymic participants being BAS- and BIS- hypersensitive. Implications for further theory and research practice are expounded upon in the discussion.

Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) posits that individual differences in reward and punishment processing predict differences in cognition, behavior, and psychopathology. We performed a quantitative review of the relationships between reinforcement sensitivity, depression and anxiety, in two separate sets of analyses. First, we reviewed 204 studies that reported either correlations between reinforcement sensitivity and self-reported symptom severity or differences in reinforcement sensitivity between diagnosed and healthy participants, yielding 483 effect sizes. Both depression (Hedges’ g = .99) and anxiety (g = 1.21) were found to be high on punishment sensitivity. Reward sensitivity negatively predicted only depressive disorders (g = -.21). More severe clinical states (e.g., acute vs remission) predicted larger effect sizes for depression but not anxiety. Next, we reviewed an additional 39 studies that reported correlations between reinforcement sensitivity and both depression and anxiety, yielding 156 effect sizes. We then performed meta-analytic structural equation modeling to simultaneously estimate all covariances and control for comorbidity. Again we found punishment sensitivity to predict depression (β = .37) and anxiety (β = .35), with reward sensitivity only predicting depression (β = -.07). The transdiagnostic role of punishment sensitivity and the discriminatory role of reward sensitivity support a hierarchical approach to RST and psychopathology. Highlights: Sensitivity to punishment positively predicts both depression and anxiety. Sensitivity to reward discriminates between them, negatively predicting depression. This pattern was ob-served even when directly controlling for comorbidity. Depression’s effect sizes are uniquely sensitive to clinical state. Depression’s effect sizes are also moderated by method of clinical assessment.Data, analysis code, supplementary material: https://osf.io/n6gv4/