Personality and Individual Differences 55 (2013) 921–925

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

The role of Dependency and Self-Criticism in the relationship between

anger and depression
Rudy Abi-Habib a,⇑, Patrick Luyten a,b
a
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, P.O. Box 3720, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
b
Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, Gower Street London, WC1E 6BT, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study explored the role of Dependency and Self-Criticism, two personality dimensions conferring
Received 18 March 2013 vulnerability for depression, in explaining relationships among anger, anger regulation strategies, and
Received in revised form 9 July 2013 severity of depression in a sample of adults (n = 253) using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Depen-
Accepted 18 July 2013
dency was associated with high levels of trait anger, the turning of anger towards the self, and low levels
Available online 12 August 2013
of anger directed towards others. Self-Criticism was associated with high levels of both state and trait
anger, low anger control, and high levels of anger towards the self and others. Moreover, turning anger
Keywords:
towards the self mediated the relationship among both Dependency and Self-Criticism and severity of
Personality
Depression
depression. Problems with anger control also mediated the relationship between Self-Criticism and
Anger severity of depression. These findings suggest that Self-Criticism may be closely related to angry/hostile
Dependency features in depression, while dependency may be more closely associated with the turning of anger
Self-Criticism towards the self. Although this study was cross-sectional and self-reports of anger might be biased by
impression management, results suggest that these personality factors should be taken into account in
both research on and treatment of anger in depression.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Anger is an important symptom in many psychological disorders
such as bipolar disorder (e.g. Perlis et al., 2004), obsessive compul-
sive disorder (e.g. Painuly, Grover, Gupta, & Mattoo, 2011), chronic
pain disorder (e.g. Bruehl, Liu, Burns, Chont, & Jamison, 2012), PTSD
(e.g. McHugh, Forbes, Bates, Hopwood, & Creamer, 2012), eating
disorders (e.g. Giovanni et al., 2011), personality disorders (e.g. Fava
& Rosenbaum, 1998), anxiety (e.g. Painuly, Grover, Mattoo, & Gupta,
2011) and depression. Studies suggest that anger and hostility are
present in about 30–40% of patients with major depressive disorder
(Baeg, Wang, Chee, Kim, & Kim, 2011; Fava & Rosenbaum, 1998,
1999; Giovanni et al., 2011; Koh, Kim, Kim, & Park, 2005; Newman,
Fuqua, Gray, & Simpson, 2006; Newman, Gray, & Fuqua, 1999;
Rude, Chrisman, Denmark, & Maestas, 2012; Vliegen & Luyten,
2008). Yet, there is still relatively little known about the role of an-
ger in depression. A review by Fisher and Greenberg (1996) of more
than 50 studies that have investigated the role of the turning of an-
ger towards the self in depression found that about 44% of these
studies support the hypothesis that depression is associated with
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sci-
ences, University of Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, P.O. Box 3720, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Tel.: +32 4 88 95 36 03.
E-mail address: Roudy.AbiHabib@ppw.kuleuven.be (R. Abi-Habib).
the turning of anger against the self, 24% contradict this hypothesis,
and 32% yielded inconsistent results. One explanation for these
conflicting findings is that depression is a heterogeneous condition
with respect to etiology and pathogenesis (Parker, 2000). This study
sets out to investigate the role of anger and anger regulation strat-
egies in particular in the relationship between the personality
dimensions of Dependency and Self-Criticism and severity of
depression in a normal community sample.
More than three decades of research has provided considerable
evidence that these two personality dimensions confer vulnerabil-
ity to depression (Blatt, 2004; Luyten & Blatt, 2011, in press).
Dependency refers to a cognitive-affective personality style that
is characterized by strong needs to be loved and taken care of, in
combination with exaggerated fears for loss and abandonment.
Self-Criticism implies a strong emphasis on control, self-definition,
and autonomy, in combination with fears of disapproval and loss of
autonomy and control. Central in these formulations is that Depen-
dency and Self-Criticism show important differences in anger
expression and regulation (Blatt, 2004; Clark & Beck, 1999).
Although highly dependent individuals are described as very sensi-
tive to frustration, and particularly to interpersonal rejection, they
would typically inhibit their anger, especially towards significant
others, for fear of losing their love and support (‘‘rage threatens
the very hand that feeds’’). One way dependent individuals may
control anger is by turning their anger towards the self (Blatt,

0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.466
922 R. Abi-Habib, P. Luyten / Personality and Individual Differences 55 (2013) 921–925
2008). Self-critical individuals, by contrast, are described as com-
petitive, hostile, and ambivalent towards others. They would have
difficulty controlling anger and would typically express their anger
towards others, often leading to conflict in interpersonal relation-
ships (Constantino & et al., 2008; Luyten, Fonagy, Lemma, & Target,
2012). At the same time, however, because of their high personal
standards, they would also turn anger towards the self in the form
of harsh Self-Criticism (Blatt, 2008; Luyten & Blatt, 2012).
Yet, despite the centrality of descriptions concerning problems
with anger and anger regulation in theoretical formulations of
Dependency and Self-Criticism, this topic has attracted little re-
search attention. One exception is a longitudinal study by Koest-
ner, Zuroff, and Powers (1991) reporting that Self-Criticism at
age 12 predicted inhibition of aggressive impulses at age 31. Sauro
et al. (2001) reported, in line with theoretical expectations, that
Dependency was not related to anger directed towards others,
and was positively related to inward-directed anger in a sample
of 67 college females. Dependency was not related to state and
trait anger in this study. Vliegen and Luyten (2008), finally, in a
sample of 55 postpartum depressed mothers, found that Depen-
dency was associated with the turning of anger against the self
but was not correlated with state and trait anger. Self-Criticism
was associated with state and trait anger, the turning of anger to-
wards the self and others and was negatively related to anger
control.
Given that none of these studies directly investigated the role of
anger and anger regulation in the relationship among these per-
sonality dimensions and severity of depression, this study aims
to further investigate the role of anger and anger regulation in
the relationship between Dependency and Self-Criticism and
severity of depression in a sample of community adults (n = 253).
Because Dependency has been associated with increased interper-
sonal sensitivity and Self-Criticism with competitiveness and hos-
tility, both Dependency and Self-Criticism were expected to be
positively related to state and trait anger (the intensity of anger
as an emotional state and angry feelings over time, respectively).
Second, in line with theoretical formulations, we expected that
Dependency would be positively related to anger control (i.e. con-
trolling anger by preventing its expression) and the turning of an-
ger towards the self (i.e. suppressing angry feelings by being angry
at oneself), and negatively to the expression of anger towards oth-
ers (i.e. expressing anger towards others or objects in the environ-
ment). Self-Criticism was expected to be positively related to the
expression of anger towards others, or negatively with anger con-
trol, and positively with the turning of anger towards the self. Fi-
nally, we tested a mediation model depicted in Fig. 1, in which
anger regulation styles partially mediate the relationships between
both personality dimensions and severity of depression.
2. Methods
2.1. Participants
Participants were 253 community adults with a mean age of
32.21 years (SD = 5.40) (58.33% female). All participants had Bel-
gian nationality. They were recruited in person, in their homes,
by students attending a course of methodology at a large Belgian
university. Each student had to find one participant who met the
following inclusion criteria: (a) age between 18 and 65 years, (b)
Dutch literacy, and (c) willing to participate in a questionnaire
study concerning depression. There were no gender differences
in anger and anger regulation strategies and in the relationships
between Dependency, Self-Criticism, and anger. Therefore, data
for men and women were combined. Table 1 presents descriptive
data for the sample.
2.2. Materials
As part of a larger assessment battery, participants completed
the following questionnaires:
The Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ; Blatt, D’Afflitti, &
Quinlan, 1976) was used to assess Dependency and Self-Criticism.
The DEQ is a well-validated measure of these personality dimen-
sions that contains 66 items measuring Dependency, Self-Criti-
cism, and Efficacy. Participants have to indicate on a 7-point
Likert-type scale how much they agree with each item going from
1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Dutch version of the
DEQ (Luyten, Corveleyn, & Blatt, 1997) has similar psychometric
qualities as the original DEQ. In this study, only the Dependency
and Self-Criticism scales were used and local factor weights were
used to score the DEQ.
The State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI; Spielberger,
1996) has been developed to assess levels of State and Trait anger
and three broad ways that people use to regulate anger, i.e. turning
anger towards the self (‘‘Anger-In’’), directing anger towards others
(‘‘Anger-Out’’) and not expressing anger by controlling angry feel-
ings (‘‘Anger-Control’’). The STAXI consists of 44 items, each scored
on a 4-point Likert type scale, measuring state anger, trait anger,
anger directed towards the self (anger-in, e.g. ‘‘I tend to harbor
grudges’’), the expression of anger towards other people or objects
(anger-out, e.g. ‘‘I say nasty things’’), and the control of anger (an-
ger-control, e.g. ‘‘I control my temper’’). Translation of the STAXI
state and trait anger scales was based on the Dutch version of
the State-Trait Anger Scale (STAS; Van der Ploeg, Defares, & Spiel-
berger, 1982). The anger-in, anger-out and anger-control scales
were translated using the commission approach consisting of one
of the authors and two research assistants (Hambleton, 1994). Esti-
mates of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) in the present
study were .83 for state anger, .86 for trait anger, .65 for anger-
in, .64 for anger-out, and .86 for anger-control.
Severity of depression was measured with the Beck Depression
Inventory (BDI; Beck & Steer, 1993). The BDI measures 21 symp-
toms of depression (scores 0–63). Psychometric characteristics of
the Dutch version of the BDI are similar to the original version
(Schotte, Maes, Cluydts, De Doncker, & Cosyns, 1997). In this study,
the estimate of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) was .79.
2.3. Procedures
The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Uni-
versity of Leuven (Belgium). Participants were recruited in person
and at their homes by undergraduate students as part of a course
on research methodology. After informed consent, participants re-
ceived a booklet containing questionnaires including the DEQ,
BDI, and STAXI, and were instructed to complete and return the
booklet in a closed, pre-addressed and stamped envelope within
four weeks. If they had not returned the completed question-
naires by that time, they were contacted up to three times by
the undergraduate students in the following two weeks. All par-
ticipants returned completed questionnaires within this 6-week
period.
2.4. Statistical analysis
Zero-order correlations were calculated to explore the relation-
ships among the study variables. Next Structural Equation Model-
ing (SEM) was used. SEM is an advanced multivariate form of
regression analysis that allows studying complex relationships
among variables. We investigated the theoretical model presented
in Fig. 1 following state of the art recommendations for the testing
of mediation (Fairchild & MacKinnon, 2009; Hayes, 2009; Hoyle &
Smith, 1994) using a two-step strategy. In a first step, we tested a
 R. Abi-Habib, P. Luyten / Personality and Individual Differences 55 (2013) 921–925 923

Fig. 1. Theoretical model of the relationships between Dependency, Self-Criticism, anger regulation strategies and severity of depression. Negative paths coefficients and
positive path coefficients are represented by – and + respectively DE P = Dependency, SC = Self-Criticism; Anger-in = Anger directed towards the self, Anger-out = the
expression of anger towards other people or objects, Anger-con = the control of anger.

Table 1
Means, standard deviation and zero-order correlations among study variables.

1 Dep – .140* .119 .117 .070 .207** .060 .045 0.418 0.965
2 SC – .455** .319** .220** .492** .393** .177** 0.615 0.898
3 Anger-in – .150* .037 .366** .337** .151* 15.395 3.567
4 Anger-out – .443** .167** .595** .204** 15.252 3.070
5 Anger-Control – .245** .537** .174** 23.584 4.559
6 Severity of Depression – .334** .353** 5.490 4.863
7 Trait Anger – .250** 16.6206 4.513
8 State Anger – 10.6877 1.871

12 345678 M SD.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

base model with all the paths included in Fig. 1. Non-significant
paths were deleted, which yielded the final base model. In a second
step, we then tested a model in which the anger regulation strate-
gies as assessed with the STAXI fully mediated the relationships
between Dependency, Self-Criticism and severity of depression,
i.e., by dropping the direct paths from Dependency and Self-Criti-
cism to severity of depression. If this more parsimonious model
did not provide a significantly worse fit than the model with the
direct effects, this indicates full mediation; else anger regulation
strategies are only partial mediators in the association between
these personality dimensions and severity of depression. The fol-
lowing fit indices and cut-off values were used: v2/df 6 3,
CFI > .90 indicating acceptable fit and >.95 indicating good fit (Hu
& Bentler, 1999; Kline, 1998) and RMSEA < 0.08 (acceptable fit)
and <0.06 (good fit) (Byrne, 1998; Hu & Bentler, 1999). To compare
the fit of the nested models (e.g., with and without direct effects),
we used v2-difference tests. AMOS (IBM, SPSS AMOS 20) was used
to test all SEM models (Fig. 2).
3. Results
3.1. Zero-order correlations
As Table 1 indicates, Dependency was, as expected, positively
related to trait anger but, contrary to expectations, not related to
state anger or to anger control. Concerning the regulation of anger,
Dependency was, as expected, positively related to the turning of
anger toward the self, and was not related to anger directed to-
wards others. Self-Criticism was, as expected, positively related
to state and trait anger, anger-in and anger-out, and was negatively
related with anger control.
3.2. Structural Equation Modeling
The base model did not provide a good fit to the data;
v2 = 52.403 p < .001; df = 3; v2/df = 17.468, CFI = .96,
RMSEA = .256. In this model, three paths were not significant,
namely from DEP to Anger-out and Anger-control and from An-
ger-out to BDI. In subsequent analyses, we therefore dropped these
paths. AMOS furthermore suggested to add two error covariances,
namely between the errors of Anger-in, Anger-control and Anger-
out and Anger-control. This led to the final base model which
had an excellent fit: v2 = 2.427, p = .658; df = 4; v2/df = .607,
CFI = 1.000; RMSEA = .000.
The model with only the indirect paths also provided a good fit
to the data, v2 = 7.253; p = .202; df = 5; v2/df = 1.451, CFI = .992;
RMSEA = .042. However, this model showed a significantly worse
fit compared to the model including the direct paths (Dv2 = 4.83,
df = 1, p = 0.02), implying that the model with both the direct
and indirect paths explained the data better.
924 R. Abi-Habib, P. Luyten / Personality and Individual Differences 55 (2013) 921–925
Fig. 2. Final Model Standardized values are given for the path coefficients. For ease of presentation errors and error coefficients are not represented. ⁄⁄⁄p < .001. DE
P = Dependency, SC = Self-Criticism; Anger-in = Anger directed towards the self, Anger-out = the expression of anger towards other people or objects, Anger-con = the control
of anger.
4. Discussion and conclusions
This study sought to further investigate the role of anger and
anger regulation in the relationships between the personality
dimensions of Dependency, Self-Criticism, two personality dimen-
sions that confer vulnerability to depression (Blatt, 2008; Luyten &
Blatt, 2012) and severity of depression in a community sample.
Zero order correlations showed that Dependency was not related
to state anger, but was positively associated with trait anger. These
findings are congruent with theoretical assumptions suggesting
that individuals with high levels of Dependency show elevated lev-
els of trait anger, which probably reflects their low frustration tol-
erance (Blatt, 2004). In contrast to a study by Sauro et al. (2001),
Dependency was not associated with the inhibition of anger gener-
ally and the inhibition of anger towards others specifically. Yet,
Dependency was, congruent with theoretical descriptions and ear-
lier studies (Blatt, 2008; Vliegen & Luyten, 2008), associated with
directing anger towards the self. Findings that Dependency was
not associated with state anger nor with directing anger towards
others and with anger control may perhaps be explained by studies
suggesting that Dependency is positively associated with impres-
sion management in that dependent individuals often seem to
underreport feelings of anger (e.g., Ewart, Jorgensen, & Kolodner,
1998; Santor & Zuroff, 1997). Hence, while they do control anger
(as is also suggested by the positive association with the turning
of anger towards the self), when directly asked, they may overtly
deny feelings of anger out of fear that even admitting anger to-
wards others will lead to rejection and abandonment. These spec-
ulations await further research.
Self-Criticism was strongly related to both state and trait anger,
compatible with theoretical assumptions according to which self-
critical individuals have high levels of hostility (Fava & Rosenbaum,
1998, 1999; Gilbert, Gilbert, & Irons, 2004). Moreover, Self-
Criticism was also related to anger directed towards the self and
others and problems with the control of anger. Future studies
should investigate whether the combination of high levels of
directing anger towards others and low control of anger reflects
problems with anger management (e.g., failure to control anger)
or simply that self-critical individuals do not find it important to
control their anger towards others.
Analyses using Structural Equation Modeling shed further light
on these dynamics. First, both Self-Criticism and Dependency were
associated with increased levels of directing anger towards the self,
which in turn were associated with higher levels of severity of
depression. Second, Self-Criticism, but not Dependency, was asso-
ciated with problems with anger control, which in turn was related
to increased severity of depression. These findings seems to sug-
gest that the more self-critical individuals have the sense that they
are losing control of their anger, the more depressed they become,
perhaps because this triggers further self-criticism. Third, Self-
Criticism was also associated with higher levels of directing anger
towards others, but this association did not explain increased lev-
els of severity of depression associated with Self-Criticism. It may
be that the observed association between high levels of Self-Criti-
cism and increased anger towards others plays an important role in
explaining vulnerability for depression associated with Self-Criti-
cism more generally, but not in explaining increased levels of
severity of depression as such. Indeed, congruent with interper-
sonal approaches of depression, the turning of anger towards oth-
ers has been shown to lead to vicious interpersonal cycles
characterized by increased feelings of frustration and anger in (sig-
nificant) others, finally resulting in social exclusion, rejection, iso-
lation and ultimately loneliness and depression (Luyten et al.,
2012). This self-fulfilling prophecy has indeed been associated
with increased vulnerability for depression. Fichman, Koestner,
and Zuroff (1996), for instance, found that Self-Criticism was re-
lated to having low perceived competences and poor social func-
tioning in a sample of 77 adolescents. This may add to the
difficulties self-critical individuals have to engage in relationships,
distancing them even more from others, leading to increased risk
for depression.
Taken together, findings of this study suggest that Dependency is
most closely related to depression associated with inhibited anger,
and perhaps also with problems acknowledging anger. It may be
that these individuals are not or only partially aware of underlying
feelings of anger, but further research using more implicit or behav-
ioral measures of anger is needed to substantiate this assumption.
Nevertheless, results for Dependency closely resemble evolutionary
accounts of depression that have linked certain types of depression
to arrested anger (Gilbert et al., 2004). Self-Criticism, in contrast,
 R. Abi-Habib, P. Luyten / Personality and Individual Differences 55 (2013) 921–925
appears to be associated with hostile/irritable issues in depression.
This latter finding might explain the increased risk for suicide asso-
ciated with this personality dimension, which has also been referred
to as the ‘‘destructiveness of self-criticism’’ (Blatt, 1995). A first lim-
itation of this study is the cross-sectional design, which limits the
ability to draw causal conclusions. It also does not allow testing po-
tential reciprocal relations between personality dimensions and an-
ger regulation strategies. Further, estimates of internal consistency
for the anger-in and anger-out were relatively low which may have
influenced results. As the results of this study suggest that personal-
ity, and Dependency in particular, might be associated with impres-
sion management, future studies should use other methods to assess
anger and anger regulation (e.g., observation, implicit measures).
We also did not consider the subdimensions of dependency. Recent
work has distinguished between different subdimensions of Depen-
dency such as destructive overdependence, dysfunctional detach-
ment and healthy mature dependency (Bornstein, 1992). Future
studies should investigate the relation between these subtypes of
dependency and anger regulation strategies. Finally, this study
was conducted in a community sample, and hence replication in
clinical samples is needed to investigate whether these findings
may be generalized to clinical samples. Despite these limitations,
overall, this study suggests considerable variability in the relation-
ships among the personality dimensions of Dependency and Self-
Criticism and severity of depression that is influenced by anger reg-
ulation strategies. Therefore, both in research and treatment, careful
attention to personality issues linked with Dependency and Self-
Criticism may both further our insight into the nature of the rela-
tionship between anger and depression and improve the treatment
of depression.
References
Baeg, S., Wang, S. K., Chee, I. S., Kim, S. Y., & Kim, J. L. (2011). Anger in elderly
patients with depressive disorders. Psychiatry Investigation, 8(3), 186–193.
Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1993). Beck depression inventory manual. San Antonio, TX:
The Psychological Corporation.
Blatt, S. J. (1995). The destructiveness of perfectionism – Implications for the
treatment of depression. American Psychologist, 50(12), 1003–1020.
Blatt, S. J. (2004). Experiences of depression: Theoretical, research and clinical
perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Blatt, S. J. (2008). Polarities of experience: Relatedness and self-definition in personality
development, psychopathology, and the therapeutic process. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association Press.
Blatt, S. J., D’Afflitti, J. P., & Quinlan, D. M. (1976). Experiences of depression in
normal young adults. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85(4), 383–389.
Bornstein, R. F. (1992). The dependent personality: Developmental, social, and
clinical perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 3–23.
Bruehl, S., Liu, X., Burns, J. W., Chont, M., & Jamison, R. N. (2012). Associations between
daily chronic pain intensity, daily anger expression, and trait anger expressiveness:
An ecological momentary assessment study. Pain, 153(12), 2352–2358.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS:
Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Clark, D. A., & Beck, A. T. (1999). Scientific foundations of cognitive theory and
depression. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Constantino, M. J. et al. (2008). Interpersonal styles of chronically depressed
outpatients: Profiles and therapeutic change. Psychotherapy, 45(4), 491–506.
Ewart, C. K., Jorgensen, R. S., & Kolodner, K. B. (1998). Sociotropic cognition
moderates blood pressure response to interpersonal stress in high-risk
adolescent girls. International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the
International Organization of Psychophysiology, 28(2), 131–142.
Fairchild, A. J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2009). A general model for testing mediation and
moderation effects. Prevention Science, 10(2), 87–99 [article].
Fava, M., & Rosenbaum, J. F. (1998). Anger attacks in depression. Depression and
Anxiety, 8(1), 59–63.
Fava, M., & Rosenbaum, J. F. (1999). Anger attacks in patients with depression. The
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 60(Suppl. 15), 21–24.
Fichman, L., Koestner, R., & Zuroff, D. C. (1996). Dependency, self-criticism, and
perceptions of inferiority at summer camp: I’m even worse than you think.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25(1), 113–126.
925
Fisher, S., & Greenberg, R. P. (1996). Freud scientifically reappraised. Testing the
theories and therapy. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Gilbert, P., Gilbert, J., & Irons, C. (2004). Life events, entrapments and arrested anger
in depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 79(1–3), 149–160.
Giovanni, A. D., Carla, G., Enrica, M., Federico, A., Maria, Z., & Secondo, F. (2011).
Eating disorders and major depression: Role of anger and personality.
Depression Research and Treatment, 2011, 194732.
Hambleton, R. K. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological
tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10,
229–244.
Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the
new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420 [article].
Hoyle, R. H., & Smith, G. T. (1994). Formulating clinical research hypotheses as
structural equation models. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62(3),
429–440 [article].
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55 [article].
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York
(N.Y.): Guilford.
Koestner, R., Zuroff, D. C., & Powers, T. A. (1991). Family origins of adolescent self-
criticism and its continuity into adulthood. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
100(2), 191–197.
Koh, K. B., Kim, D. K., Kim, S. Y., & Park, J. K. (2005). The relation between anger
expression, depression, and somatic symptoms in depressive disorders and
Somatoform disorders. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66(4), 485–491.
Luyten, P., & Blatt, S. J. (2011). Integrating theory-driven and empirically-derived
models of personality development and psychopathology: A proposal for DSM
V. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(1), 52–68.
Luyten, P., & Blatt, S. J. (2012). Psychodynamic treatment of depression. Psychiatric
Clinics of North America, 35(1), 111–129.
Luyten, P., & Blatt, S. J. (2013). Relatedness and self-definition in normal and
disrupted personality development: Retrospect and prospect. American
Psychologist 68(3), 2013, 172–183.
Luyten, P., Corveleyn, J., & Blatt, S. J. (1997). Dutch version of the depressive
experiences questionnaire. Leuven, Belgium: University of Leuven.
Luyten, P., Fonagy, P., Lemma, A., & Target, M. (2012). Depression. In A. Bateman & P.
Fonagy (Eds.), Handbook of Mentalizing in mental health practice (pp. 385–417).
Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
McHugh, T., Forbes, D., Bates, G., Hopwood, M., & Creamer, M. (2012). Anger in
PTSD: Is there a need for a concept of PTSD-related posttraumatic anger?
Clinical Psychology Review, 32(2), 93–104.
Newman, J. L., Fuqua, D. R., Gray, E. A., & Simpson, D. B. (2006). Gender differences in
the relationship of anger and depression in a clinical sample. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 84(2), 157–162.
Newman, J. L., Gray, E. A., & Fuqua, D. R. (1999). Sex differences in the relationship of
anger and depression: An empirical study. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 77(2), 198–203.
Painuly, N. P., Grover, S., Gupta, N., & Mattoo, S. K. (2011a). Prevalence of anger
attacks in depressive and anxiety disorders: Implications for their construct?
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 65(2), 165–174.
Painuly, N. P., Grover, S., Mattoo, S. K., & Gupta, N. (2011b). Anger attacks in
obsessive compulsive disorder. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 20(2), 115–119.
Parker, G. (2000). Classifying depression: Should paradigms lost be regained? The
American Journal of Psychiatry, 157(8), 1195–1203.
Perlis, R. H., Smoller, J. W., Fava, M., Rosenbaum, J. F., Nierenberg, A. A., & Sachs,
G. S. (2004). The prevalence and clinical correlates of anger attacks during
depressive episodes in bipolar disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 79(1–3),
291–295.
Rude, S. S., Chrisman, J. G., Denmark, A. B., & Maestas, K. L. (2012). Expression of
direct anger and hostility predict depression symptoms in formerly depressed
women. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science-Revue Canadienne Des Sciences
Du Comportement, 44(3), 200–209.
Santor, D. A., & Zuroff, D. C. (1997). Interpersonal responses to threats to status and
interpersonal relatedness: Effects of dependency and self-criticism. British
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 36, 521–541.
Sauro, M. D., Jorgensen, R. S., Larson, C. A., Frankowski, J. J., Ewart, C. K., & White, J.
(2001). Sociotropic cognition moderates stress-induced cardiovascular
responsiveness in college women. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 24(5),
423–439.
Schotte, C. K., Maes, M., Cluydts, R., De Doncker, D., & Cosyns, P. (1997). Construct
validity of the Beck Depression Inventory in a depressive population. Journal of
Affective Disorders, 46(2), 115–125.
Spielberger, C. D. (1996). State-Trait anger expression inventory. professional manual.
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.
Van der Ploeg, H. M., Defares, P. B., & Spielberger, C. D. (1982). Handleiding bij de
Zelf-Analyse Vragenlijst ZAV [Manual of the Dutch State-Trait Anger Scale]. Lisse,
The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Vliegen, N., & Luyten, P. (2008). The role of dependency and self-criticism in the
relationship between postpartum depression and anger. Personality and
Individual Differences, 45(1), 34–40.