A comparison of specific positive future expectancies and global hopelessness as predictors of suicidal ideation in a prospective study of repeat self-harmers

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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of affective disorders Vol. 110; no. 3; pp. 207 - 214
Main Authors O'Connor, Rory C, Fraser, Louisa, Whyte, Marie-Claire, MacHale, Siobhan, Masterton, George
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.10.2008
Elsevier
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary: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.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0165-0327
1573-2517
DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2008.01.008