|Appears in Collections:||Psychology Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||A comparison of specific positive future expectancies and global hopelessness as predictors of suicidal ideation in a prospective study of repeat self-harmers|
|Citation:||O'Connor R, Fraser L, Whyte M, MacHale S & Masterton G (2008) A comparison of specific positive future expectancies and global hopelessness as predictors of suicidal ideation in a prospective study of repeat self-harmers. Journal of Affective Disorders, 110 (3), pp. 207-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2008.01.008|
|Abstract:||Background. Hopelessness and the lack of positive future expectancies have been related to suicidality. This is the first study to compare the power of positive future expectancies and global hopelessness in the prediction of suicidal ideation. In short, are specific positive expectancies or global hopelessness attitudes more closely related to suicidality? Method. One hundred and forty four adults hospitalized following a suicidal self-harm episode completed a range of clinical and psychological measures in hospital and were followed up approximately 2.5 months after discharge. All participants reported at least one other self-harm episode in addition to the index episode. Results. Hierarchical regression analyses confirmed that specific positive future expectancies were better predictors of Time 2 suicidal ideation than global hopelessness. In addition, as hypothesized, negative future thinking was not independently associated with suicidal ideation. Limitations. Short-term follow-up. Conclusions. Specific, idiographic expectancies for positive events (i.e., positive future thinking) are more important predictors of suicidal ideation than global attitudes of hopelessness. Unlike global hopelessness, they provide more options for intervention (e.g., identifying life goals and plans). These findings are particularly noteworthy given the widespread use of measures of global hopelessness. The theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.|
|Rights:||Published by Elsevier|
|RCOConnorJADSTORRE.pdf||Fulltext - Accepted Version||85.18 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.