Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Moderating effects of sociotropy and autonomy on affective and self-esteem reactivity to daily stressors

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognitive Therapy and Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We conducted a 10-day diary study that assessed daily stressors and end-of-day affect and self-esteem. We predicted that sociotropy would be associated with stronger sadness and self-esteem reactivity to daily interpersonal, but not achievement events, and that autonomy would be associated with the same pattern for daily achievement, but not interpersonal events. For the sample as whole, both daily interpersonal and achievement stressors were related to increased sadness and decreased self-esteem. As expected, the relationships involving interpersonal stressors were stronger for those high on sociotropy. However, the negative relationship between achievement stressors and self-esteem was also stronger for those high on sociotropy. Autonomy was associated with weaker self-esteem reactivity to interpersonal stressors. Our results are consistent with previous research on major life events, suggesting that sociotropy functions as a nonspecific vulnerability factor, and that autonomy’s role is unclear. Our results also suggest the heuristic value of a daily diary design to study the mechanisms underlying vulnerability factors’ role in the development and maintenance of depression.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Based on psychoanalytic theory, Blatt (1974) proposed the depression vulnerability factors of dependency and self-criticism, which are similar to Beck’s factors of sociotropy and autonomy. The Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt, D’Afflitti, & Quinlan, 1976) was developed to measure these constructs. The respective scales on the PSI and DEQ are highly intercorrelated (about .70) (Zuroff & Fitzpatrick, 1995).

  2. Participants also rated their worst problem of the day on six appraisal dimensions (e.g., undesirability, control) and then completed 16 items from the brief COPE (Carver, 1997) to report their use of various coping strategies (e.g., emotional support, planning) to deal with their worst problem of the day.

  3. For exploratory purposes, we conducted multilevel analyses to rigorously examine the unique effects of sociotropy and autonomy on exposure to different types of daily events, that is occurrence of interpersonal, achievement, and total negative events and positive events. (See Bolger & Zuckerman, 1995 for a discussion of Level 2 analyses of stress exposure.) There was only one effect, and it was a trend: Sociotropy was positively associated with number of interpersonal positive events, when neuroticism, gender, and autonomy were controlled, γ03 = .007, p = .068.

  4. To estimate the magnitude of the effect of sociotropy and autonomy on the reactivity slopes for daily stressors, we calculated the proportion reduction in mean squared prediction error when sociotropy or autonomy was entered into the Level 2 equations. Incremental variance explained by sociotropy was: (a) 1.9% for sadness reactivity to interpersonal stressors; (b) 1.4% for sadness reactivity to total stressors; (c) 2.9% for self-esteem reactivity to interpersonal stressors; and (d) 1.3% for self-esteem reactivity to total stressors. Sociotropy did not reduce the percentage of variance in self-esteem reactivity to achievement stressors. Incremental variance explained by autonomy was: (a) 5.7% in self-esteem reactivity to interpersonal stressors; and (b) 2.9% in self-esteem reactivity to total stressors.

  5. We conducted a number of partial correlations involving sociotropy and autonomy and variables related to participants’ worst event of the day, controlling for gender, neuroticism, and the other PSI variable. None of these correlations were significant for percentage of worst events that were interpersonal, achievement, or other. There were significant positive correlations between sociotropy and appraisals of importance for interpersonal stressors and perceived coping efficacy for achievement stressors. There were a large number of significant partial correlations for the coping variables. In general, autonomy was associated with increased coping efforts regardless of whether interpersonal or achievement events were nominated as the day’s most stressful.

  6. We also examined differences in affective and self-esteem reactivity to different types of negative events (i.e., interpersonal and achievement) nominated as the worst event of the day, and how reactivity to those events might be moderated by sociotropy and autonomy. Analyses were conducted first using a dummy-coded interpersonal event variable (1 = interpersonal, 0 = noninterpersonal), and then using a dummy coded achievement event variable (1 = achievement, 0 = nonachievement). Whether the worst event of the day was interpersonal or noninterpersonal had a significant effect on end of day sadness, γ10 = 1.888, p < .001, and positive affect, γ10 = −2.357, p < .001, such that end-of-day sadness was higher, and end-of-day positive affect was lower, when the negative event was interpersonal. Neither sociotropy nor autonomy had a significant moderating effect on these relationships. Whether the worst event of the day was interpersonal or noninterpersonal also had a significant effect on end-of-day self-esteem, γ10 = −.985, p < .001, such that end of day self-esteem was lower when the event was interpersonal. Sociotropy did not have a significant moderating effect on this relationship, but autonomy had a near-significant moderating effect, γ10 = .030, p = .078, such that autonomy was associated with weaker reactivity to type of event. Overall, individuals reacted to interpersonal stressors, compared with noninterpersonal stressors, with a greater decrease in self-esteem, but this pattern was weaker for autonomous individuals. Whether the worst event of the day was achievement or nonachievement did not have a significant effect on end-of-day sadness, positive affect, and self-esteem.

References

  • Alford, B., & Gerrity, D. (1995). The specificity of sociotropy-autonomy personality dimensions to depression and anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51, 190–195.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, N. B., de L. Horne, D. J., & Trinder, J. (1996). Sociotropy, autonomy, and dysphoric emotional responses to specific classes of stress: A psychophysiological evaluation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 25–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Alloy, L. B., Abramson, L. Y., Hogan, M. E., Whitehouse, W. G., Rose, D. T., Robinson, M. S., et al. (2000). The Temple-Wisconsin Cognitive Vulnerability to Depression Project: Lifetime history of Axis I psychopathology in individuals at high and low cognitive risk for depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109, 403–418.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bagby, R. M., Parker, J. D. A., Joffe, R. T., Schuller, D., & Gilchrist, E. (1998). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Revised Personal Style Inventory (PSI). Assessment, 5, 31–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beck A. T. (1983). Cognitive therapy for depression: New perspectives. In P. J. Clayton & J. E. Barrett (Eds.), Treatment of depression: Old controversies and new approaches. New York: Raven. pp. 265–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieling, P. J., & Alden, L. E. (2001). Sociotropy, autonomy, and the interpersonal model of depression: An integration. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, 167–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blatt, S. J. (1974). Levels of object representation in anaclitic and introjective depression. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 29, 107–157.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blatt, S., D’Afflitti, J., & Quinlan, D. (1976). Experiences of depression in normal young adults. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 383–389.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 579–616.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bolger, N., & Zuckerman, A. (1995). A framework for studying personality in the stress process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 890–902.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Broderick, J., & Stone, A. (2006). Paper and electronic diaries: Too early for conclusions on compliance rates and their effects. Psychological Methods, 11, 106–111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, A. C., Hokanson, J. E., & Flynn, H. A. (1994). A comparison of self-esteem lability and low trait self-esteem as vulnerability factors for depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 166–177.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: Consider the Brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 92–100.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, D., Beck, A., & Alford, B. (1999). Scientific foundations of cognitive theory and therapy of depression. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A. Watson, D., & Mineka, S. (1994). Temperament, personality, and the mood and anxiety disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Gunthert, K., Butler, A., O’Neill, S., & Tolpin, L. (2005). Daily affective reactivity as a prospective predictor of depressive symptoms. Journal of Personality, 73, 1687–1713.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, J. C., Thompson, R., & Whiffen, V. (2004). Is the promissory note of personality as vulnerability to depression in default? Reply to Zuroff, Mongrain, and Santor. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 512–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, J., & Whiffen, V. (1995). Issues in personality as diathesis for depression: The case of sociotropy-dependency and autonomy-self-criticism. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 358–378.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eckenrode, J. (1984). Impact of chronic and acute stressors on daily reports of mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 907–918.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fresco, D. M., Sampson, W. S., Craighead, L. W., & Koons, A. N. (2001). The relationship of sociotropy and autonomy to symptoms of depression and anxiety. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 15, 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenier, K. D., Kernis, M. H., McNamara, C. W., Waschull, S. B., Berry, A. J., Herlocker, C. E., & Abend, T. A. (1999). Individual differences in reactivity to daily events: Examining the roles of stability and level of self-esteem. Journal of Personality, 67, 185–208.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gunthert, K. C., Cohen, L., & Armeli, S. (1999). The role of neuroticism in daily stress and coping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1087–1100.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gunthert, K. C., Cohen, L. H., Butler, A. C., & Beck, J. S. (2005). Predictive role of daily coping and affective reactivity in cognitive therapy outcome: Application of a daily process design to psychotherapy research. Behavior Therapy, 36, 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammen, C. (1991). Generation of stress in the course of unipolar depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 555–561.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hammen C. (2001). Vulnerability to depression in adulthood. In R. Ingram & J. Price (Eds.), Vulnerability to psychopathology: Risk across the lifespan. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 226–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hankin, B., Fraley, C., & Abela, J. (2005). Daily depression and cognitions about stress: Evidence for a trait-like depressogenic cognitive style and the prediction of depressive symptoms in a prospective daily diary study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 673–685.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, R. E., Miranda, J., & Segal, Z. V. (1998). Cognitive vulnerability to depression. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, P., Cambell, D. G., & Williams, M. G. (2001). Sociotropy and autonomy: Preliminary evidence for construct validity using TAT narratives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 77, 128–138.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, P., & Whisman, M. A. (1998). Sociotropy and autonomy as vulnerabilities to specific life events: Issues in life event categorization. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 22, 353–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse, J. Q., & Robins, C. J. (2005). Personality-life event congruence effects in late-life depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 84, 25–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. R., Hammen, C., Daley, S. E., Burge, D., & Davila, J. (2001). Sociotropic and autonomous personality styles: Contributions to chronic life stress. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, 61–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nezlek, J. B., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Depression as a moderator of relationships between positive daily events and day-to-day psychological adjustment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1692–1704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1991). Responses to depression and their effects on the duration of the depressive episode. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 569–582.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. J. (1985). Global self-esteem scales: unidimensional or multidimensional?. Psychological Reports, 57, 383–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, S., Cohen, L., Tolpin, L., & Gunthert, K. (2004). Affective reactivity to daily interpersonal stressors as a prospective predictor of depressive symptoms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 172–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peeters, F., Nicolson, N. A., Berkhof, J., Delespaul, P., & deVries, M. (2003). Effects of daily events on mood states in major depressive disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 203–211.00.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pillow, D. R., Zautra, A. J., & Sandler, I. (1996). Major life events and minor stressors: Identifying mediational links in the stress process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 381–394.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Raghavan, C., Le, H. N., & Berenbaum, H. (2002). Predicting dysphoria and hostility using the diathesis-stress model of sociotropy and autonomy in a contextualized stress setting. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 26, 231–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robins, C., Hayes, A., Block, P., Kramer, R., & Villena, M. (1995). Interpersonal and achievement concerns and depressive vulnerability and symptom specificity hypotheses: A prospective study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, C. J., Ladd, J. S., Welkowitz, J., Blaney, P. H., Diaz, R., & Kutcher, G. (1994). The Personal Style Inventory: Preliminary validation studies of new measures of sociotropy and autonomy. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16, 277–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T. A. B., & Boskers, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, A. A., & Neale, J. M. (1984). New measure of daily coping: Development and preliminary results. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 892–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suls, J., Martin, R., & David, J. P. (1998). Person-environment fit and its limits: Agreeableness, neuroticism, and emotional reactivity to interpersonal conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 88–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennen, H., & Affleck, G. (2002). The challenge of capturing daily processes at the interface of social and clinical psychology. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 21, 610–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolpin, L., Cohen, L., Gunthert, K., & Farrehi, A. (2006). Unique effects of depressive symptoms and relationship satisfaction on exposure and reactivity to daily romantic relationship stress. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 565–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolpin, L., Gunthert, K., Cohen, L., & O’Neill, S. (2004). Borderline personality features and instability of daily negative affect and self-esteem. Journal of Personality, 72, 111–137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1994). The PANAS-X: Manual for the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule—Expanded Form. Iowa City: University of Iowa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zautra, A., Affleck, G., Tennen, H., Reich, J., & Davis, M. (2005). Dynamic approaches to emotions and stress in everyday life: Bolger and Zuckerman reloaded with positive as well as negative affects. Journal of Personality, 73, 1511–1538.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zuroff, D. C., & Fitzpatrick, D. K. (1995). Depressive personality styles: Implications for adult attachment. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 253–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuroff, D. C., Mongrain, M., & Santor, D. A. (2004). Conceptualizing and measuring personality vulnerability to depression: Comment on Coyne and Whiffen (1995). Psychological Bulletin, 130, 489–511.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We thank Clive Robins for providing helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA

    Kimberly B. Dasch, Lawrence H. Cohen & Jorden C. Sahl

  2. American University, Washington, DC, USA

    Kathleen C. Gunthert

Authors
  1. Kimberly B. Dasch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lawrence H. Cohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jorden C. Sahl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kathleen C. Gunthert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence H. Cohen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dasch, K.B., Cohen, L.H., Sahl, J.C. et al. Moderating effects of sociotropy and autonomy on affective and self-esteem reactivity to daily stressors. Cogn Ther Res 32, 177–195 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-007-9126-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-007-9126-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation