Rumination and the mood-as-input hypothesis: Does congruence matter?

The mood-as-input hypothesis (MAIH), which emphasizes the role of mood and stop rules on perseverative thinking, has been extensively studied in relation to worry (Meeten & Davey, 2011). However, relatively few studies have focused on the applicability of the MAIH to depressive rumination. Consequently, two studies were conducted to further examine the potential relevance of the MAIH to depressive rumination.

In the first study, a sample of undergraduate students completed a rumination interview under one of four conditions, including mood (positive vs. negative) and stop rule (as-many-as can (AMA) and feel like stopping (FL)). It was anticipated that participants in the negative mood/AMA and the positive mood/FL conditions would exhibit the most persistence in the rumination interview. A second, follow-up study was conducted in which a positive rumination condition was added to examine the role of congruence between mood induction and task valence on interview performance.

In the first study, support for predictions of the MAIH was found in the negative mood conditions but not the positive mood conditions. In the second study, as predicted, under conditions of mood congruence, the original predictions of the MAIH were supported. However, under conditions of mood incongruence, participants appeared to default to the assigned stop rule.

Although the findings are promising, it is noteworthy that the sample was non-clinical. Further, this approach to studying depressive rumination may have somewhat limited ecological validity, as the research was conducted in a controlled laboratory setting.

Overall, the current findings provide insight into the conditions under which depressive rumination is most likely to occur.