Next Article in Journal
Case Report of Cerebral Sinus Thrombosis Related to Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia Following Administration of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for Vaccination against COVID-19
Next Article in Special Issue
Analysis of Antidepressant, Benzodiazepine Anxiolytic, and Hypnotic Use When Treating Depression, Anxiety, and Aggression in Pain Clinic Patients Treated for Neuropathic Pain
Previous Article in Journal
Fetal Membranes Contribute to Drug Transport across the Feto-Maternal Interface Utilizing the Breast Cancer Resistance Protein (BCRP)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Cellular Response to Unfolded Proteins in Depression
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Life
Volume 12
Issue 2
10.3390/life12020167
life-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Hypothesis

J. Young’s Early Maladaptive Schemas and Symptoms of Male Depression

by
Jan Chodkiewicz
,
Mateusz Wydrzyński
and
Monika Talarowska
*
Institute of Psychology, University of Lodz, 91-433 Lodz, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Life 2022, 12(2), 167; https://doi.org/10.3390/life12020167
Submission received: 22 November 2021 / Revised: 18 January 2022 / Accepted: 21 January 2022 / Published: 24 January 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Depressive Disorders-New Challenges)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Aim: There are more non-specific, hence harder to diagnose, symptoms in the picture of male depression. These symptoms are strongly linked to social norms and roles traditionally assigned to men. The aim of this study was to assess the interrelationship of early maladaptive schemas that affect the formation of self-image as a man with indicators of male depression. Materials and methods: The Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening (GSDS-26) by A.M. Möller-Leimkühler and the Early Maladaptive Schema Questionnaire by J. Young (YSQ-S3-PL) were used. A group of 75 men (aged 18 to 50) were qualified to take part in the research. Results: The total score of the GSDS-26 scale and individual indicators of male depression are strongly positively correlated with the severity of all five domains of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire. The highest correlation coefficient value was obtained in the following areas: “Disconnection and rejection” (0.741), “Other-directedness” (0.711), and “Overvigilance and inhibition” (0.711). In case of the GSDS-26 total score and the following indicators—Elevated stress, Aggressiveness, Emotional control, Risky behavior, and Classic symptoms of depression—positive statistically significant associations were confirmed with each of the 18 schemas from the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire. Multiple regression results revealed that the following domains were significant for symptoms typical of male depression: “Disconnection and rejection” and “Impaired autonomy and performance”. The “Impaired limits” area was found to be statistically significant only for symptoms of classic depression. Conclusions: (1) The GSDS-26 scale scores show positive associations with each domain of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire. (2) The following areas seem to be more important for atypical depressive symptoms in men: “Disconnection and rejection” and “Impaired autonomy and performance”, while for classic depression: “Impaired limits” was more important. (3) In therapeutic work with male depressive symptoms, it is useful to focus on dominant maladaptive schemas alongside beliefs about stereotypical male roles.

1. Introduction

It is widely recognized that depression is a heterogeneous entity. An individualized approach to understanding the etiology of depression seems to be increasingly important [1,2]. It is especially important to take into account gender differences in the etiology and clinical course of this disease [3]. However, for many decades, they focused primarily on the mental health of women. Attempts were made to explain differences in the prevalence of symptoms of anxiety disorders, eating disorders, specific personality disorders, or depressive disorders with gender dimorphism [4]. Issues related to the mental health of men received little attention. These differences have begun to gradually blur over the past 10 years [5]. It has been pointed out that the social, health, and economic costs of untreated mental disorders in men are much more severe than for women [6]. The risk of a successful suicide attempt (according to the National Police Headquarters in Poland, 85% of all deaths resulting from a suicide attempt in 2020 were male deaths [7]; similar values are observed in other European countries [8]) as well as the risk of developing an addiction to psychoactive substances is significantly higher among men [9,10].
The observations mentioned above have drawn the researchers’ attention to the issue of depression in men. It has been noted that there may be more non-specific symptoms in the picture of male depression that are less noticeable to the surroundings and therefore more difficult to diagnose. Furthermore, these symptoms are strongly associated with social norms and roles traditionally attributed to men (Table 1) [11].
Such a conceptualization of male depression led to attempts to study it and, consequently, to the development of appropriate diagnostic methods. The best known tool is the Gotland Male Depression Scale (GMDS) by Rutz [14]. Another scale, namely the Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening (GSDS-26) by A.M. Möller-Leimkühler, has been gradually gaining popularity. This scale—unlike the GMDS—allows for the assessment of various dimensions of male depression (they are described below in the section dedicated to the methodology of the presented study) [15].
The prevalence of depressive disorders and the social costs associated with them have prompted numerous studies on their etiology. In addition to biological and social factors, particular attention is given to the role of early childhood experiences such as emotional abuse, neglect, and unmet needs. Numerous meta-analyses have shown that these experiences are important predictors of depression occurring in both adolescence and adulthood e.g., [16,17].
The concept that seems to explain the mechanism and first of all the dynamics of disorder formation on the basis of early childhood experiences is the theory of early maladaptive schemas (EMS) created by Jeffrey E. Young [18]. The theory, which belongs to the so-called third wave of cognitive–behavioral therapy, emphasizes the importance of early childhood experiences in the formation of mental disorders as well as the need to refer in therapy to the history of development and life of the given patient [19].
According to the assumptions of EMS, the experiences we make in our earliest stages of development shape relatively stable patterns of functioning and beliefs about ourselves, other people, and the world around us. These patterns are referred to as schemas. In his theory, Young described 18 maladaptive schemas, grouped into five areas (domains) based on unmet needs. Failure to meet or inadequately meet one (or more) of the child’s basic developmental needs (so-called core needs) becomes the primary source of dysfunctional schemas [20]. Failure to meet these needs causes emotions that are difficult for the child, such as anxiety, anger, shame, or guilt. In an effort to avoid experiencing them, individuals engage in a variety of behavioral and coping strategies that—while reducing tension—also contribute to the perpetuation of the schemas [21].
Numerous studies confirm the associations of selected schemas with the onset of symptoms of recurrent depressive disorder, bipolar affective disorder, suicidal tendencies, obsessive–compulsive disorder, social phobia, addictions, and of course personality disorders and self-injury tendencies e.g., [22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. However, not enough studies focusing on early maladaptive schemas typical of male depression have been conducted so far [32].
Taking into account the aforementioned dependence, the aim of this study was to assess the interrelationships between J. Young’s early maladaptive schemas affecting the development of self-image as a man and indicators of male depression assessed using the GSDS-26 scale.

2. Method

Due to the current epidemiological situation, the research—whose results are presented herein—was conducted fully anonymously and online using a Google form, in the period between September and December 2020. The respondents (adults only) were enrolled by means of the ‘snowball’ method. The research procedure was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association [33] and the ethical codes of the Belmont Report [34]. The study was approved by the Bioethical Committee of the Medical University of Lodz no: RNN/254/19/KE.
Selected methods of descriptive statistics and methods of statistical reasoning were applied in the statistical analysis of the collected material. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient and stepwise multiple regression coefficient were used to assess the relationship between the analyzed variables [35]. All statistical calculations were performed using STATISTICA PL computer software, version 13.3.
A self-reported questionnaire served to collect sociodemographic data. In addition, the following tools were applied:
  • Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening (GSDS-26) by A.M. Möller-Leimkühler. The scale consists of 26 statements allowing for the assessment of both typical symptoms of depression (one dimension) and symptoms that make up the five dimensions of male depression, i.e., increased levels of experienced stress, aggressiveness, emotional control, alcohol abuse, and engaging in risky behavior. The answers given are rated on a four-point scale (0–3). The Polish adaptation of the method characterized by satisfactory psychometric properties was applied [15,36].
  • J. Young’s Early Maladaptive Schema Questionnaire (YSQ-S3-PL) in the Polish adaptation by Oettingen et al. [37]. The method examines the intensity of each of the 18 schemas based on the self-report of a respondent, who is asked to respond to highlighted statements. This allows the pattern of schemas characteristic of a particular person to be identified. The questionnaire consists of 90 test items (5 for each schema). The scores for each schema are in the range of 5 to 30. The arithmetic mean for each schema and the total score for all are also calculated. When analyzing the results obtained in the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire, a division into 5 schema areas selected by the author was used, i.e., Disconnection and rejection, Impaired autonomy and performance, Impaired limits, Other-directedness, Overvigilance and inhibition [38]. The Polish version of the method is characterized by acceptable psychometric properties [37].

3. Material

Study participants were enrolled by means of the ‘snowball’ method. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were as follows: age between 20 and 45 years, giving informed consent to participate in the study, no history of other Axis I or Axis II psychiatric disorders (other than a diagnosis of a depressive episode in the past).
A group of 75 men (aged 18 to 50) were qualified to take part in the research. The mean age of the respondents was 25.5 years (SD = 5.68). The characteristics of sociodemographic variables are presented in Table 2. Table 3 presents information regarding the past psychiatric treatment of the subjects. Those subjects who at the time of the examination or in the past declared a psychiatric diagnosis other than depressive episode and recurrent depressive disorder and were treated for those reasons were excluded from participation in the study.
Only 9 men in the study group are or were treated in the past for depressive disorder symptoms.

4. Results

The results recorded in the GSDS-26 scale and the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire in the studied group are presented in Table 3.
In order to look at the associations of male depressive symptoms with early maladaptive schemas, a correlational analysis was conducted using the Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient. First, analyses were performed for the five domains of early maladaptive schemas (Table 4), which was followed by individual 18 schemas.
As Table 4 shows, the overall score of the GSDS-26 scale and individual indicators of male depression are strongly positively correlated with the severity of all five domains of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire. The highest correlation coefficient value was obtained for “Disconnection and rejection”, “Other-directedness”, and “Overvigilance and inhibition”. This means that failure to satisfy the need for security, empathy, stability, acceptance, and respect during childhood (“Disconnection and rejection”), the need to express one’s needs and emotions, which leads to excessive focus on others’ desires, emotions, and reactions at the expense of one’s own needs (“Other-directedness”), and the need for spontaneity (“Overvigilance and inhibition”) may be particularly relevant to the onset of male depressive symptoms.
With respect to the GSDS-26 subscales, the weakest correlations were recorded for the following two indicators: alcohol abuse and tendency for risky behaviors. Furthermore, the GSDS-26 scale indicator related to alcohol abuse significantly correlates only with the aforementioned area of “Other-directedness” and the area of “Impaired autonomy and performance”. This may be a consequence of the selection of the research group-people treated for reasons other than depressive disorders, including those with a diagnosis of personality disorders or substance abuse, were excluded.
A detailed analysis of the results of correlation of the 18 maladaptive schemas with the GSDS-26 scale scores confirmed the above analyses. In case of the GSDS-26 total score and the following indicators—Elevated stress, Aggressiveness, Emotional control, Risky behavior, and Classic symptoms of depression—positive statistically significant associations were confirmed with each of the 18 schemas from the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire. In contrast, for the alcohol abuse indicator, a positive statistically significant but weak correlation was confirmed only for the “Emotional inhibition” schema (Rho = r = 0.241, p = 0.04). This schema manifests itself in the form of behaviors such as exaggerated inhibition of spontaneous actions, feelings, and communication with others in order to avoid disapproval from others, feeling of shame, or loss of control.
The next step in the statistical analyses was to assess the significance of the five areas of maladaptive schemas on the severity of the GSDS-26 scale indicators. For this purpose, the progressive stepwise multiple regression method was used to perform statistical calculations (Table 5).
The value of the “Elevated stress levels” indicator is associated in nearly 40% with one domain of early maladaptive schemas, namely “Other-directedness”. In contrast, the score volatility for the “Aggressiveness” indicator is explained in 43% by one schema area as well, namely “Impaired autonomy and performance”.
“Disconnection and rejection”, “Impaired autonomy and performance”, and “Overvigilance and inhibition” play a significant role in case of the GSDS-26 scale indicator called “Emotional control”. Volatility of the “Emotional control” indicator is explained by these three domains in 45%.
The two indicators of the GSDS-26 scale only slightly explained by the values of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire are “Alcohol abuse” and “Risky behaviors”. As before, this phenomenon can be explained by the specifics of the selection of the study group (alcohol abusers and people with personality disorder diagnoses were excluded). However, it is noteworthy that the single significant predictor for both of these indicators was again found to be the “Impaired autonomy and performance” domain.
Another indicator, namely “Classic symptoms of depression”, is explained in nearly 50% by two domains of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire, i.e., “Disconnection and rejection” and “Impaired limits”. It is noteworthy that the “Impaired limits” domain only appears to be a predictor of classic symptoms of depression, not atypical ones.
The overall score of the GSDS-26 scale can be explained in more than 60% in the male subjects by the variability of two domains, i.e., “Disconnection and rejection” and “Other-directedness” (in this case, the result is at the level of central tendency).
Summarizing the results obtained, it is worth noting that among the five domains of early maladaptive schemas, the regression analysis most often includes “Impaired autonomy and performance” (four GSDS-26 scale indicators) and “Disconnection and rejection” (three GSDS-26 scale indicators).

5. Discussion

As with personality traits, schemas are an indispensable part of a person’s mental structure. They have the nature of unconditional beliefs, not questioned by the given person; they constitute an important part of the person’s identity, his or her knowledge about themselves, other people, as well as about the surrounding world. Their strength, reinforcement, and frequency of activation determine the impact they have on the daily functioning of the given person [39]. However, their presence in itself does not indicate a disorder; everyone uses schemas. When faced with challenges that arise, different types of schemas can be activated to effectively deal with the difficult situation and the emotions that result. However, for maladaptive schemas formed in childhood, their activation in adulthood negatively affects how information is acquired, encoded, and stored, leading to dysfunctional emotions and behavioral responses [40]. Thus, the response to the activation of these schemas is usually part of their maintenance mechanism, which hinders the possibility of change [41,42].
The aforementioned observations are confirmed by numerous studies indicating that scores obtained in the Early Maladaptive Schema Questionnaire are a reliable and relatively stable marker of depressive disorders [43,44,45]. Approximately 60% of patients with depressive symptoms achieve a symptomatic improvement following the use of psychotherapy in the form of schema therapy [46,47].
According to Shorey et al. [48], early maladaptive schemas are stronger predictors of depression in men than in women. In the aforementioned study, the authors found statistically significant associations between the five schema domains and 11 schemas (out of 18) and the severity of depressive symptoms in men. Among the female subjects, only the “Other-directedness” area and two out of 18 non-adaptive schemas were found to be significant for the severity of depressive symptoms [48]. Male respondents also had significantly higher summed scores in each schema domain compared to females [48]. The classic symptoms of depression, regardless of gender, are in turn associated with the domains of “Disconnection and rejection”, “Impaired autonomy and performance”, and “Other-directedness” [49]. Thus, it would be worthwhile to test in the future how such a comparison between the sexes looks with the application of the method used in this paper to study depression.
In a longitudinal, 9-year study involving patients with a diagnosis of depressive disorder, Wang et al. [44] found a nearly 60% correlation between the areas of “Disconnection and rejection” and “Impaired limits” and the severity of depressive symptoms. It is noteworthy that in this study, the “Disconnection and rejection” domain was found to be a predictor of scores on two depression subscales and the GSDS-26 scale total score. In contrast, interestingly and worthy of further exploration, the domain of “Impaired limits” was found to be a predictor only of classic symptoms of depression and not of atypical ones.
On the other hand, Tezel et al. [50] observed an association between an impaired communication style and the aforementioned domains of maladaptive schemas. The “Impaired limits” area is also associated with health risk behaviors [46]. According to Sedlinská et al. [51], patients with symptoms typical of male depression more often present personality traits from the so-called B cluster than from the A and C clusters, which also correlates with the aforementioned maladaptive schemas typical of men.
How can we link early maladaptive schemas to symptoms of male depression? The need to conform to traditional cultural and social norms are said to be some of the reasons for atypical depression in men. These norms for men relate to independence, bravery, competitiveness, mental and physical toughness, self-control, and the ability to suppress feelings and avoid anything “feminine” [52,53]. Some authors also claim that these norms include the need for risk taking, aggressiveness, multiple sexual encounters and conquests, dominance over women, explicit and manifested attachment to work, and gaining and maintaining social status [54,55]. Relationships may also include the ability to detect signs of depression in oneself (men who strictly adhere to the norm about the need to control emotions have more difficulty both recognizing their own lowered mood and consciously feeling grief and sadness) [1]. Moreover, people who believe that “problems should be dealt with on one’s own”, much later (if at all) ask for help from those around them, which may significantly worsen the personal, family, and financial situation of the patient, prolong the duration of therapy, and increase the risk of suicide. What is more, Sundag et al. [56] and Zeynel and Uzer [57] demonstrate that early maladaptive schemas are passed from generation to generation through parenting styles and coping strategies preferred by caregivers. Thus, cultural patterns and social norms associated with stereotypical male behaviors may be key in perpetuating maladaptive schemas leading to symptoms of male depression. However, confirmation of this relationship requires further research, including longitudinal studies.
The study presented herein demonstrated associations of typical and atypical depressive symptoms with different domains of maladaptive schemas according to Young. This means that the higher severity of maladaptive schemas included in them favors the occurrence of both types of depressive symptoms in men. The relationship between the intensity of maladaptive schemas and the severity of typical depression (most commonly measured by Beck’s BDI) has already been demonstrated for both men and women e.g., [45,58], and it is also supported by a recent large meta-analysis [40]. However, there has been no confirmation of these relationships for atypical depression to date.
Analyzing the obtained correlations, it is worth paying special attention to the “Impaired autonomy and performance” domain, which shows associations with such atypical and frequent symptoms of depression in men as aggressiveness, emotional control, alcohol abuse, and risky behavior. In an attempt to characterize people scoring high in this domain, we can see that they often lack self-confidence, fear failure in their achievements, and feel threatened and dependent. Such individuals were treated overprotectively as children, with the belief that they could not cope without loved ones, and their confidence and independence was not fostered [18,20]. Therefore, it may be hypothetically assumed that such a way of upbringing contributes in these men (especially in the situation of increased life demands and unavoidable confrontation with male role norms) to high levels of frustration and helplessness, suppression of emotions instead of searching for solutions, which may be alleviated with alcohol or “regulated” through emotional discharges and thus lead to the occurrence and deepening of depressive symptoms. Confirmation of this hypothesis obviously requires appropriate research.
The mentioned relationship also leads to therapeutic conclusions. When working therapeutically with symptoms of male depression, it is useful to focus on beliefs about stereotypical male roles and behaviors as well as dominant schemas. This can both improve the therapeutic relationship (patients will be less likely to hide their symptoms and not be ashamed of them) and reduce the risk of depression recurrence [11]. Focusing on the schema domains identified in this study (“Disconnection and rejection” and “Impaired autonomy and performance”) may also have positive implications for the prevention of male depression [40]. In addition, the study highlights the point and importance of a careful analysis of dominant symptoms present in men experiencing depression, as different schemas and domains may be responsible for their occurrence, which may have serious implications for therapy effectiveness.

6. Limitations

Some of the limitations of the study include the relatively small study group and the participation of virtually only men without depressive symptoms. However, the mean overall score of the subjects obtained on the GSDS-26 scale is M = 18.8. The cut-off point for the German version of the scale is 18 points [15]. In the future, it is advisable to examine the associations of depressive symptoms with maladaptive schemas in men with (current and past) depressive disorders.

7. Conclusions

  • The GSDS-26 scale scores show positive associations with each domain of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire.
  • For atypical depressive symptoms in men, the following areas seem to be more important, namely “Disconnection and rejection” and “Impaired autonomy and performance”, while for classic depression, “Impaired limits” is more important.
  • In therapeutic work with male depressive symptoms, it is useful to focus on dominant maladaptive schemas alongside beliefs about stereotypical male roles.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.C., M.W., M.T.; methodology, J.C.; formal analysis, J.C., M.T.; investigation, M.W.; data curation, J.C., M.T.; writing—original draft preparation, J.C., M.T.; writing—review and editing, J.C., M.T.; supervision, M.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The research procedure was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association [33] and the ethical codes of the Belmont Report [34]. The study was approved by the Bioethical Committee of the Medical University of Lodz no: RNN/254/19/KE.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Institute of Psychology, University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Maj, M.; Stein, D.J.; Parker, G.; Zimmerman, M.; Fava, G.A.; de Hert, M.; Demyttenaere, K.; McIntyre, R.S.; Widiger, T.; Wittchen, H.U. The clinical characterization of the adult patient with depression aimed at personalization of management. World Psychiatry 2020, 19, 269–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Reynolds, C.F. Optimizing personalized management of depression: The importance of real-world contexts and the need for a new convergence paradigm in mental health. World Psychiatry 2020, 19, 266–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Oliffe, J.L.; Ogrodniczuk, J.S.; Gordon, S.J.; Creighton, G.; Kelly, M.T.; Black, N.; Mackenzie, C. Stigma in Male Depression and Suicide: A Canadian Sex Comparison Study. Community Ment. Health J. 2016, 52, 302–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Affleck, W.; Carmichael, V.; Whitley, R. Men′s Mental Health: Social Determinants and Implications for Services. Can. J. Psychiatry 2018, 63, 581–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Whitley, R. Men′s Mental Health: Beyond Victim-Blaming. Can. J. Psychiatry 2018, 63, 577–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Bilsker, D.; Fogarty, A.S.; Wakefield, M.A. Critical Issues in Men’s Mental Health. Can. J. Psychiatry 2018, 63, 590–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Komenda Główna Policji, The Statistics of Suicides. Available online: https://statystyka.policja.pl/st/wybrane-statystyki/zamachy-samobojcze/63803,Zamachy-samobojcze-od-2017-roku.html (accessed on 9 August 2020).
  8. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database (accessed on 20 November 2021).
  9. Keohane, A.; Richardson, N. Negotiating Gender Norms to Support. Men in Psychological Distress. Can. J. Psychiatry 2018, 63, 160–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Sørensen, E.H.; Thorgaard, M.V.; Østergaard, S.D. Male depressive traits in relation to violent suicides or suicide attempts: A systematic review. J. Affect. Disord. 2020, 262, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chodkiewicz, J.; Miniszewska, J. Male depression—The concept, measurement tools and relationships with suicidal behaviours. Psychiatr. Psychol. Klin. 2016, 16, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Rice, S.M.; Fallon, B.J.; Aucote, H.M.; Möller-Leimkühler, A.M.; Treeby, M.S.; Amminger, G.P. Longitudinal sex differences of externalising and internalising depression symptom trajectories: Implications for assessment of depression in men from an online study. Int. J. Soc. Psychiatry. 2015, 61, 236–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Bartova, B.; Dold, M.; Fugger, G.; Kautzky, A.; Mitschek, M.M.M.; Weidenauer, A.; Hienert, M.G.; Frey, R.; Mandelli, L.; Zohar, J.; et al. Sex-related effects in major depressive disorder: Results of the European Group for the Study of Resistant Depression. Depress. Anxiety. 2021, 38, 896–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Rutz, W.; von Knorring, L.; Pihlgren, H.; Rihmer, Z.; Wålinder, J. An educational project on depression and its consequences: Is the frequency of major depression among Swedish men underrated, resulting in high suicidality? Prim. Care Psychiatry 1995, 1, 59–63. [Google Scholar]
  15. Möller-Leimkühler, A.M.; Mühleck, J. Development and Preliminary Validation of a Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening (GSDS). Psychiatr. Prax. 2020, 47, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. LeMoult, J.; Humphreys, K.L.; Tracy, A.; Hoffmeister, J.A.; Ip, E.; Gotlib, I.H. Meta-analysis: Exposure to early life stress and risk for depression in childhood and adolescence. J. Am. Acad. Child. Adolesc. Psychiatry 2020, 59, 842–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Paterniti, S.; Sterner, I.; Caldwell, C.; Bisserbe, J.C. Childhood neglect predicts the course of major depression in a tertiary care sample: A follow-up study. BMC Psychiatry 2017, 17, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Young, J.E.; Klosko, J.S.; Weishaar, M.E. Schema Therapy: A Practitioner′s Guide; Guilford Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  19. Masley, S.A.; Gillanders, D.T.; Simpson, S.G.; Taylor, M.A. A systematic review of the evidence base for Schema Therapy. Cogn. Behav. Ther. 2012, 41, 185–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Batool, N.; Shehzadi, H.; Riaz, M.N.; Riaz, M.A. Paternal malparenting and offspring personality disorders: Mediating effect of early maladaptive schemas. J. Pak. Med. Assoc. 2017, 67, 556–560. [Google Scholar]
  21. Renner, F.; van Goor, M.; Huibers, M.; Arntz, A.; Butz, B.; Bernstein, D. Short-term group schema cognitive-behavioral therapy for young adults with personality disorders and personality disorder features: Associations with changes in symptomatic distress, schemas, schema modes and coping styles. Behav. Res. Ther. 2013, 51, 487–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Marteinsdottir, I.; Furmark, T.; Tillfors, M.; Fredrikson, M.; Ekselius, L. Personality traits in social phobia. Eur. Psychiatry 2001, 16, 143–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Pinto-Gouveia, J.; Castilho, P.; Galhardo, A.; Cunha, M. Early maladaptive schemas and social phobia. Cognit. Ther. Res. 2006, 30, 571–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Unoka, Z.; Tölgyes, T.; Czobor, P. Early maladaptive schemas and body mass index in subgroups of eating disorders: A differential association. Compr. Psychiatry 2007, 48, 199–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Hawke, L.D.; Provencher, M.D. Early maladaptive schemas among patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder. J. Affect. Disord. 2012, 136, 803–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Kim, J.iE.; Lee, S.W.; Lee, S.J. Relationship between early maladaptive schemas and symptom dimensions in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2014, 215, 134–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Kwak, K.H.; Lee, S.J. A comparative study of early maladaptive schemas in obsessive-compulsive disorder and panic disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2015, 230, 757–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Khosravani, V.; Alvani, A.; Seidisarouei, M. The relation of early ma ladaptive schemas and behavioral inhibition/approach systems to defense styles in abusers of synthetic drug: A cross-sectional study. J. Subst. Use 2016, 21, 652–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Taylor, C.D.J.; Bee, P.; Haddock, G. Does schema therapy change schemas and symptoms? A systematic review across mental health disorders. Psychol. Psychother. 2017, 90, 456–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Munuera, C.; Roux, P.; Weil, F.; Passerieux, C.; M′Bailara, K. Determinants of the remission heterogeneity in bipolar disorders: The importance of early maladaptive schemas (EMS). J. Affect. Disord. 2020, 277, 857–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nicol, A.; Mak, A.S.; Murray, K.; Kavanagh, P.S. Early maladaptive schemas in young people who self-injure. J. Clin. Psychol. 2021, 77, 1745–1762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Siahmoshtei, J.; Delavar, A.; Borjali, A. A preliminary study: Designing and validating projective images of Young′s early maladaptive schema (EMS) domains. BMC Psychol. 2021, 9, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Declaration of Helsinki, version 2013; World Medical Association′s: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  34. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report —Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research; The Commission: Belmont, MA, USA, 1979.
  35. Kirkwood, B.; Sterne, J. Essential Medical Statistics, 2nd ed.; Wiley-Bleckwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  36. Chodkiewicz, J.; Miniszewska, J.; Talarowska, M. Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening (GSDS-26)—Polish Adaptation. Łódź. 2020; (unpublished). [Google Scholar]
  37. Oettingen, J.; Chodkiewicz, J.; Mącik, D.; Gruszczyńska, E. Polish adaptation of the Young Schema Questionnaire 3 Short Form (YSQ-S3-PL). Psychiatr. Pol. 2018, 52, 707–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Young, J. Young Schema Questionnaire—Short Form 3 (YSQ-S3); Cognitive Therapy Center: New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  39. Leppänen, V.; Kärki, A.; Saariaho, T.; Lindeman, S.; Hakko, H. Changes in schemas of patients with severe borderline personality disorder: The Oulu BPD study. Scand. J. Psychol. 2015, 56, 78–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Bishop, A.; Younan, R.; Low, J.; Pilkington, P.D. Early maladaptive schemas and depression in adulthood: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. van Vreeswijk, M.; Broersen, J.; Nadort, M. The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Schema Therapy: Theory, Research and Practice; Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  42. Pilkington, P.D.; Bishop, A.; Younan, R. Adverse childhood experiences and early maladaptive schemas in adulthood: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 2021, 28, 569–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Halvorsen, M.; Wang, C.E.; Richter, J.; Myrland, I.; Pedersen, S.K.; Eisemann, M.; Waterloo, K. Early maladaptive schemas, temperament and character traits in clinically depressed and previously depressed subjects. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 2009, 16, 394–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Wang, C.E.; Halvorsen, M.; Eisemann, M.; Waterloo, K. Stability of dysfunctional attitudes and early maladaptive schemas: A 9-year follow-up study of clinically depressed subjects. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 2010, 41, 389–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Cormier, A.; Jourda, B.; Laros, C.; Walburg, V.; Callahan, S. Influence between early maladaptive schemas and depression. L’encephale 2011, 37, 293–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Malogiannis, I.A.; Arntz, A.; Spyropoulou, A.; Tsartsara, E.; Aggeli, A.; Karveli, S.; Vlavianou, M.; Pehlivanidis, A.; Papadimitriou, G.N.; Zervas, I. Schema therapy for patients with chronic depression: A single case series study. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 2014, 45, 319–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Renner, F.; Arntz, A.; Peeters, F.P.M.L.; Lobbestael, J.; Huibers, M.J.H. Schema therapy for chronic depression: Results of a multiple single case series. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 2016, 51, 66–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Shorey, R.C.; Stuart, G.L.; Anderson, S. Do Gender Differences in Depression Remain after Controlling for Early Maladaptive Schemas? An Examination in a Sample of Opioid Dependent Treatment Seeking Adults. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 2013, 20, 401–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  49. Tariq, A.; Reid, C.; Chan, S.W.Y. A meta-analysis of the relationship between early maladaptive schemas and depression in adolescence and young adulthood. Psychol. Med. 2021, 51, 1233–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Tezel, F.K.; Kişlak, Ş.T.; Boysan, M. Relationships between childhood traumatic experiences, early maladaptive schemas and interpersonal styles. Nöro. Psikiyatr. Arşivi. 2015, 52, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Sedlinská, T.; Mühle, C.; Richter-Schmidinger, T.; Weinland, C.; Kornhuber, J.; Lenz, B. Male depression syndrome is characterized by pronounced Cluster B personality traits. J. Affect. Disord. 2021, 292, 725–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Rice, S.M.; Fallon, B.J.; Aucote, H.M.; Möller-Leimkühler, A.M. Development and preliminary validation of the Male Depression Risk Scale: Furthering the assessment of depression in men. J. Affect. Disord. 2013, 151, 950–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Sher, L. Suicide in men. J. Clin. Psychiatry 2015, 76, 371–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Krumm, S.; Checchia, C.; Koesters, M.; Kilian, R.; Becker, T. Men′s Views on Depression: A Systematic Review and Metasynthesis of Qualitative Research. Psychopathology 2017, 50, 107–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Mahalik, J.R.; Locke, B.D.; Ludlow, L.H.; Diemer, M.A.; Scott, R.P.J.; Gottfried, M.; Freitas, G. Development of the conformity to masculine norms inventory. Psychol. Men Masc. 2003, 4, 3–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Sundag, J.; Zens, C.; Ascone, L.; Thome, S.; Lincoln, T.M. Are Schemas Passed on? A Study on the Association Between Early Maladaptive Schemas in Parents and Their Offspring and the Putative Translating Mechanisms. Behav. Cogn. Psychother. 2018, 46, 738–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zeynel, Z.; Uzer, T. Adverse childhood experiences lead to trans-generational transmission of early maladaptive schemas. Child. Abus. Negl. 2020, 99, 104235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Davoodi, L.; Wen, A.; Dobson, K.; Noorbala, A.A.; Mohammadi, A.; Farahmand, Z. Early maladaptive schemas in depression and somatization disorder. J. Affect. Disord. 2018, 235, 82–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Classic symptoms of depression and symptoms of male depression [12,13].
Table 1. Classic symptoms of depression and symptoms of male depression [12,13].
Classic Symptoms of DepressionSymptoms of Male Depression (So-Called Atypical Depression)
Sadness
Being worried
Insecurity
Sense of helplessness and hopelessness		Outbursts of anger
Abuse of psychoactive substances (alcohol, nicotine, drugs)
Risky behavior
Fatigue
Feeling of tension combined with a decrease in resistance to stress
Symptoms of professional burnout
Avoidance of contact with others (including family relationships)
Impulse control disorders (to a degree not previously present)
Unspecified somatic symptoms
Table
Table 2. Characteristics of the examined group—sociodemographic variables (N = 75).
Table 2. Characteristics of the examined group—sociodemographic variables (N = 75).
N = 75%
Place of residence
Rural settlement1215.58
Town with up to 100,000 inhabitants1722.57
City with more than 100,000 inhabitants4661.85
Education
Primary11.33
Vocational22.67
Secondary3242.67
Higher4053.33
Marital status
Bachelor4154.67
Married2533.33
Civil partnership 810.67
Legal separation --
Divorced 11.33
Widower--
Employment
I study/learn 5066.67
I don’t work45.32
Permanent employment 2128.1
Retirement/pension --
Table
Table 3. Severity of depressive symptoms and early maladaptive schemas in the study group (N = 75).
Table 3. Severity of depressive symptoms and early maladaptive schemas in the study group (N = 75).
VariablesMSDMin.Max.SkewnessKurtosis
GSDS-26
Sum18.8110.920410.181−0.726
Elevated stress levels (5 items)5.323.450140.381−0.373
Aggressiveness (6 items)2.622.890121.5742.165
Emotional control (4 items)5.343.280120.113−0.931
Alcohol abuse (3 items)1.151.65071.4291.390
Risky behavior (3 items)0.761.66062.1643.453
Classic symptoms of depression (5 items)3.613.120120.694−0.286
YSQ-S3-PL
Sum243.717590425−0.042−0.518
disconnection and rejection
Sum66.4725.81251450.331−0.251
Emotional deprivation11.815.865300.661−0.161
Abandonment/instability13.936.215280.366−0.607
Mistrust/abuse13.865.785300.4960.159
Defectiveness/shame11.446.255300.1630.053
Social isolation/alienation15.416.295290.897−0.838
impaired autonomy and performance
Sum44.4718.2220870.471−0.564
Dependence/incompetence11.365.265260.709−0.101
Vulnerability to harm or illness11.765.525270.461−0.666
Enmeshment/undeveloped self10.234.915230.748−0.219
Failure to achieve11.125.365270.8730.359
impaired limits
Sum29.498.1310500.0110.224
Entitlement/grandiosity15.284.815290.3310.391
Insufficient self-control/self-discipline14.215.055300.3950.481
other-directedness
Sum43.4414.021569−0.169−0.711
Subjugation11.735.625270.648−0.466
Self-sacrifice15.495.585280.123−0.414
Approval seeking/recognition seeking16.315.61528−0.208−0.522
overvigilance and inhibition
Sum59.8417.532099−0.163−0.344
Negativity/pessimism14.495.675260.173−0.816
Emotional inhibition15.095.92529−0.067−0.777
Unrelenting standards/hypercriticalness16.965.265290.134−0.151
Punitiveness13.295.445280.217−0.468
GSDS—Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening; YSQ-S3-PL—Young Schema Questionnaire; M—mean; SD—standard deviation; Min.—minimum value; Max.—maximum value.
Table
Table 4. Values of Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient for the GSDS-26 scale scores and five domains of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire.
Table 4. Values of Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient for the GSDS-26 scale scores and five domains of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire.
Variables
GSDS-26
Elevated Stress LevelsAggressivenessEmotional ControlAlcohol AbuseRisky BehaviorClassic Symptoms of DepressionSum
YSQ-S3-PL
Sum		0.595 *0.573 *0.508 *0.1970.382 *0.726 *0.775 *
YSQ-S3-PL/Area
Disconnection and rejection0.511 *0.547 *0.566 *0.1610.325 *0.693 *0.741 *
Impaired autonomy and performance0.575 *0.579 *0.361 *0.237 **0.354 *0.648 *0.696 *
Impaired limits0.473 *0.405 *0.427 *0.1820.341 *0.673 *0.655 *
Other-directedness0.625 *0.518 *0.394 *0.236 **0.374 *0.641 *0.711 *
Overvigilance and inhibition0.556 *0.489 *0.503 *0.1310.342 *0.665 *0.711 *
GSDS—Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening; YSQ-S3-PL—Young Schema Questionnaire; *-p ≤ 0.001; **-p ≤ 0.05.
Table
Table 5. Progressive stepwise regression coefficient results for GSDS-26 scale scores (dependent variables) and five domains of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire (independent variables).
Table 5. Progressive stepwise regression coefficient results for GSDS-26 scale scores (dependent variables) and five domains of the YSQ-S3-PL questionnaire (independent variables).
VariableGSDS
Elevated Stress Levels
R2bp
Intercept term0.396−1.9770.086
Other-directedness0.1060.005 *
Aggressiveness
R2bp
Intercept term0.432−2.2990.002 *
Impaired autonomy and performance0.0750.002 *
Emotional Control
R2bp
Intercept term0.447−0.1910.854
Disconnection and rejection0.0970.001 *
Impaired autonomy and performance−0.0980.001 *
Overvigilance and inhibition0.0570.048 *
Alcohol Abuse
R2bp
Intercept term0.086−0.0390.936
Impaired autonomy and performance0.0270.011 *
Risky Behavior
R2bp
Intercept term0.154−0.8340.081
Impaired autonomy and performance0.0350.001 *
Classic Symptoms of Depression
R2bp
Intercept term0.489−3.5580.001 *
Disconnection and rejection0.0530.001 *
Impaired limits0.1220.007 *
GSDS-26 Sum
R2Bp
Intercept term0.633−9.0160.002 *
Disconnection and rejection0.1610.003 *
Other-directedness0.1820.061
GSDS—Gender-Sensitive Depression Screening; YSQ-S3-PL—Young Schema Questionnaire; *-p statistically significant.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chodkiewicz, J.; Wydrzyński, M.; Talarowska, M. J. Young’s Early Maladaptive Schemas and Symptoms of Male Depression. Life 2022, 12, 167. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12020167

AMA Style

Chodkiewicz J, Wydrzyński M, Talarowska M. J. Young’s Early Maladaptive Schemas and Symptoms of Male Depression. Life. 2022; 12(2):167. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12020167

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chodkiewicz, Jan, Mateusz Wydrzyński, and Monika Talarowska. 2022. "J. Young’s Early Maladaptive Schemas and Symptoms of Male Depression" Life 12, no. 2: 167. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12020167

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop