Abstract
Clinical scientists disagree about whether worry and rumination are distinct or represent a unitary construct. To inform this debate, we performed a series of meta-analyses evaluating the relationship between worry and different forms of rumination. A total of 719 effect sizes (N = 69,305) were analyzed. Worry showed a large association with global rumination and with the brooding and emotion-focused subtypes of rumination (rs = .51–.53). However, even when corrected for measurement error, the correlations did not approach unity (ρs = .57–.62). Worry showed a smaller, though still significant, association with the reflection subtype of rumination (r = .28, ρ = .34). Characteristics of the study, sample, and measures moderated the worry–rumination relationship. Worry and rumination, as indexed by current self-report measures, reflect closely related but nonredundant constructs. Given that these constructs have both common and distinct features, researchers should select between them carefully and, when possible, study them together.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
