Untitled

292 EFFECTS OF STRESScontrol” (Parker, 1983), may also contribute to development of cognitive vulnerabilityto depression in offspring.Alloy et al. (2001) examined the modeling, feedback, and parenting hypotheses.Consistent with modeling, mothers of HR participants had more negativecognitive styles, particularly dysfunctional attitudes, than mothers of LR participants.Supporting the feedback hypothesis, according to both child and parentreports on the Parental Attributions for Children’s Events (PACE) Scale (Alloyet al., 2001), both mothers and fathers of HR participants provided more negativeIF about causes and consequences of negative life events that happened to theirchild than did mothers and fathers of LR participants (see also Crossfield, Alloy,Abramson, & Gibb, 2002). Supporting the parenting hypothesis, according bothto child and parent reports on the Children’s Report of Parental Behavior Inventory(Schaefer, 1965), fathers of HR participants showed less warmth in raisingtheir child than did fathers of LR participants (Alloy et al., 2001). Moreover,negative parental IF and fathers’ low warmth predicted prospective onsets of depressiveepisodes in their offspring during the followup period, mediated by theoffspring’s cognitive risk status (Alloy et al., 2001).Rose and Abramson (1992) hypothesized that a developmental history of maltreatmentmay contribute to the origins of cognitive vulnerability to depression.They hypothesized that emotional abuse should be especially likely to lead todevelopment of negative cognitive styles because the depressive cognitions (e.g.,“You’re so stupid; you’ll never amount to anything”) are directly supplied to thechild by the abuser. Consistent with the maltreatment hypothesis, we found thatHR participants reported more emotional, but not physical or sexual, maltreatmentthan LR participants (Gibb et al., 2001a, 2001b). In addition, controlling forparticipants’ initial depressive symptoms, a reported history of emotional maltreatmentpredicted onsets of MD, HD, and levels of suicidal ideation across theprospective follow-up, mediated totally or in part by their cognitive vulnerabilityand hopelessness (Gibb et al., 2001a, 2001b). Moreover, controlling for parentaldepression, parental cognitive styles, and parental abuse, peer victimization wasalso associated with cognitive HR status (Gibb, Abramson, & Alloy, 2004), suggestingthat the association of emotional maltreatment with cognitive vulnerabilityis not entirely due to genetic effects or a negative family environment in general.Application of the Cognitive Vulnerability-Stress Modelto the Surge in Depression and Emergenceof Gender Differences in AdolescenceThe five constructs in the cognitive vulnerability-transactional stress model arenegative life events (stress), cognitive vulnerability, rumination, Cognitive Vulnerability× Stress interaction, and hopelessness. If the model explains the adolescentsurge in depression and the emergence of gender differences, then increasesin levels or operation or “consolidation” of one or more of these variables should