健康与遗传心理学研究室知识库

已有大量研究表明青少年易激惹和抑郁之间存在纵向预测关系。然而，迄今尚未有实证研究深入探讨易激惹引发抑郁的机制。敌意解释偏向和愤怒沉浸这两种认知特点与易激惹密切相关，并且许多研究也指出它们与抑郁之间存在紧密联系。本研究的主要目的在于探讨易激惹引发抑郁的认知机制，具体来说，是敌意解释偏向和愤怒沉浸是否在其中起到中介作用。

本研究设计了四个实证研究，逐步深入研究了这一科学问题。研究 Ia 的主要目的是修订并验证青少年易激惹的测量工具。通过对 395 名普通青少年（M = 13.44 岁，SD = 2.51 岁）和403名青少年家长的配对样本问卷调查，进行情绪反应性指数青少年自我报告版（ARI-S）和家长报告版（ARI-P）的心理测量性能评价。主要结果：中文版情绪反应性指数在信度、4 周重测信度和效度方面表现良好，所有条目均具有良好的心理测量性能，具有单因子结构。结论：中文版情绪反应性指数用于测量青少年易激惹的信效度良好，适用于9 至 17 岁普通青少年群体。

研究 Ib 的主要目的是构建情绪反应性指数的中国常模并确定其界值。该研究通过对14个省、自治区和直辖市的30,535名普通青少年被试（M = 12.98 岁，SD = 1.66岁）进行问卷调查进行。主要结果：中文版情绪反应性指数青少年自我报告版得分达到或超过4分的青少年易激惹水平较同龄人明显偏高，以 4 分为界值能有效区分健康青少年和易激惹风险人群。结论：中文版情绪反应性指数青少年自我报告版的建议界值为4分。

研究 II 旨在中国大陆确定青少年易激惹和抑郁的因果关系。对 222 名普通青少年被试（T2 时点 M = 14.00 岁，SD = 2.27 岁）进行了为期一年的追踪研究，采用交叉滞后分析确定易激惹和抑郁的纵向预测关系。主要结果：易激惹能够正 向预测 1 年后的抑郁，而抑郁则不能正向预测 1 年后的易激惹。结论：在中国的普通青少年群体中，易激惹和抑郁之间存在因果关系。

研究 III 旨在研究 II 的基础上进一步探索易激惹引发抑郁的认知机制。通过对 463 名普通青少年被试（M = 13.60 岁，SD = 2.49 岁）进行横截面问卷调查，探讨敌意解释偏向和愤怒沉浸在易激惹和抑郁两者之间的中介作用。主要结果：在易激惹和抑郁两者之间，存在易激惹对抑郁的直接作用，敌意解释偏向的单独中介作用，愤怒沉浸的单独中介作用，以及敌意解释偏向-愤怒沉浸的链式中介作用。在三条间接作用路径中，愤怒沉浸在易激惹引发抑郁的过程中起着更为重要的作用。结论：在易激惹引发抑郁的过程中，敌意解释偏向和愤怒沉浸可能是参与其间的认知机制，其中愤怒沉浸起到更为重要的作用。

Numerous studies have demonstrated a longitudinal predictive relationship between irritability and depression among adolescents. However, there has been a lack of empirical research delving into the mechanisms by which irritability triggers depression. Hostile interpretation bias and anger rumination, two cognitive characteristics, are closely associated with irritability, and many studies have also indicated a close relationship between them and depression. The main purpose of this study is to explore the cognitive mechanisms through which irritability triggers depression, specifically examining whether hostile interpretation bias and anger rumination play a mediating role in this process.

Four empirical studies were designed to progressively investigate this scientific question. Study Ia aimed to validate a measurement tool for adolescent irritability. Psychometric evaluation of the adolescent self-report (ARI-S) and parent report (ARIP) versions of the Affective Reactivity Index (ARI) were examined through paired samples of 395 general adolescent participants (M = 13.44 years, SD = 2.51 years) and 403 parents of adolescents. Results: The Chinese version of the ARI demonstrated good reliability, 4-week test-retest reliability, and validity, with all items exhibiting good measurement performance and a single-factor structure. Conclusion: The Chinese version of the ARI shows good reliability and validity in measuring adolescent irritability, suitable for use in the general adolescent population aged 9 to 17 years.

Study Ib aimed to establish the Chinese norms of the ARI-S and determine its threshold score. This study surveyed 30,535 general adolescents (M = 12.98 years, SD = 1.66 years) from 14 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the central government. Results: Adolescents who score 4 or higher on the ARI-S exhibit significantly higher levels of irritability compared to their peers, and a threshold score of 4 effectively distinguishes between healthy adolescents and those at risk for irritability. Conclusion: The recommended threshold score for the ARI-S is 4 points.

Study II aimed to ascertain the causal relationship between youth irritability and depression within the context of Chinese culture. A one-year longitudinal study was conducted on 222 adolescents (M = 14.00 years at Time 2, SD = 2.27 years), utilizing cross-lagged analysis to determine their longitudinal predictive relationship. Results: Irritability positively predicted depression one year later, while depression did not positively predict irritability one year later. Conclusion: There is a causal relationship between irritability and depression among the general adolescent population in China.

Study III aimed to further explore the cognitive mechanisms by which irritability triggers depression. This was accomplished through a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of 463 adolescent participants (M = 13.60 years, SD = 2.49 years), investigating the roles of hostile attributional bias and anger rumination in this process. Results: Between irritability and depression, there is a direct effect of irritability on depression, a sole mediating effect of hostile interpretation bias, a sole mediating effect of anger rumination, and a serial mediating effect of hostile interpretation bias through anger rumination. Among these three indirect pathways, anger rumination plays a more crucial role in the process of irritability leading to depression. Conclusion: In the process of irritability leading to depression, hostile interpretation bias and anger immersion may be involved, with anger rumination playing a more critical role.