A penny for your thoughts: dimensions of self-generated thought content and relationships with individual differences in emotional wellbeing

Abstract

A core aspect of human cognition involves overcoming the constraints of the present environment by mentally simulating another time, place, or perspective. Although these self-generated processes confer many benefits, they can come at an important cost, and this cost is greater for some individuals than for others. Here we explore the possibility that the costs and benefits of self-generated thought depend, in part, upon its phenomenological content. To test these hypotheses, we first developed a novel thought sampling paradigm in which a large sample of young adults recalled several recurring thoughts and rated each thought on multiple content variables (i.e., valence, specificity, self-relevance, etc.). Next, we examined multi-level relationships among these content variables and used a hierarchical clustering approach to partition self-generated thought into distinct dimensions. Finally, we investigated whether these content dimensions predicted individual differences in the costs and benefits of the experience, assessed with questionnaires measuring emotional health and wellbeing. Individuals who characterized their thoughts as more negative and more personally significant scored higher on constructs associated with Depression and Trait Negative Affect, whereas those who characterized their thoughts as less specific scored higher on constructs linked to Rumination. In contrast, individuals who characterized their thoughts as more positive, less personally significant, and more specific scored higher on constructs linked to improved wellbeing (Mindfulness). Collectively, these findings suggest that the content of people's inner thoughts can (1) be productively examined, (2) be distilled into several major dimensions, and (3) account for a large portion of variability in their functional outcomes.

Keywords: autobiographical; depression; mind-wandering; mindfulness; rumination.

FIGURE 1

Phenomenological characteristics of self-generated thought. Individual data points represent each participant’s mean across 36 self-generated thoughts. Open circles represent outliers > 2.5 SD above or below the group mean (vertical bar) which are not included in calculations. The scale for temporal orientation corresponds to: 1 = more than 3 years ago, 2 = within the past 3 years, 3 = within the past 365 days (a year’s time), 4 = within the past 30 days (a month’s time), 5 = within the past 7 days (a week’s time), 6 = yesterday, 7 = earlier today, 8 = later today, 9 = tomorrow, 10 = within the next 7 days (a week’s time), 11 = within the next 30 days (a month’s time), 12 = within the next 365 days (a year’s time), 13 = within the next 3 years, 14 = more than 3 years from now.

FIGURE 2

Relationships between content variables. Relationships between content variables were averaged across 76 participants. For scales corresponding to each content variable, see Figure 1 and Table 1. Note that higher scores for Duration of Topic correspond to thoughts concerning topics or events lasting shorter durations. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.0008 (alpha corrected for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni method).

FIGURE 3

Hierarchical clustering reveals major dimensions of thought content. Higher scores for the Level of Construal cluster correspond to thoughts that are more temporally and perceptually specific, as well as more socially oriented. Higher scores for the Personal Significance cluster correspond to thoughts rated as more personally significant. Higher scores for the Outlook cluster correspond to thoughts rated as more positive and future-oriented. On the y-axis, height is a measure of similarity or distance between content variables such that two variables forming a single cluster at a small height are more similar than two variables linked at a greater height.

FIGURE 4

Independent content predictors of constructs relevant for mental health. Positive βs are characterized by thoughts that are more concrete, more personally significant, more future oriented and more positive (see scales in Figure 1). (A) Personal Significance and Valence contributed a significant amount of variance toward explaining Depression/Negative Affect. (B) Level of Construal was the only dimension that contributed a significant amount of variance toward predicting individual differences in Rumination. (C) Level of Construal and Personal Significance contributed a significant amount of variance toward predicting Mindfulness, with a considerable additional contribution of Valence (β = 0.25, p = 0.054). *p ≤ 0.05.