Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 1;186:320–327. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.07.019

Table 2.

Change in cognitive variables.

Mean at follow-up (SD) Regression results
B (SE) p 95% CI
Reward-seeking 9:1 8:2 7:3 6:4
Model 1
Comparison .68 (.21) .64 (.19) .58 (.20) .54 (.21) −.05 (.04) .16 −.13, .02
CBT .69 (.21) .64 (.21) .55 (.21) .52 (.26)
TRY .68 (.28) .70 (.24) .62 (.26) .62 (.24) .12 (.04) .01 .03, .20
MBCT .72 (.21) .73 (.17) .65 (.20) .61 (.21) .04 (.04) .32 −.04, .11
Ratio .04 (.01) <.001 .03, .05
CBT*Ratio .01 (.01) .44 −.01, .03
TRY*Ratio −.03 (.01) .03 −.05, −.002
MBCT*Ratio −.04 (.01) .71 −.02, .02
Negative self-beliefs(RT)
Model 2
Comparison 1117.76 (2388.44)
CBT 2678.25 (5688.63) 1081.88 (895.24) .23 −672.77, 2836.52
TRY 1134.32 (295.00) −768.00 (907.70) .40 −2547.06, 1011.07
MBCT 1317.54 (2688.39) −718.55 (1102.69) .52 −2879.78, 1442.68
Over-general memory
Model 3
Comparison .39 (.25)
CBT .32 (.26) .01 (.06) .85 −.10, .12
TRY .43 (.26) −.04 (.05) .45 −.15, .07
MBCT .32 (.24) −.03 (.05) .62 −.13, .07

Model 1 adjusts for gender; age, baseline reward seeking, and quality of decision making (i.e. the % of trials on which the more likely of the two colors (blue or red) was chosen). Negative self-beliefs RT=reaction time to agree versus disagree with dysfunctional attitudes where larger reaction times index more reflective processing. Model 2 adjusts for age, gender, baseline total dysfunctional attitudes score, baseline number of agreements on dysfunctional attitudes scale and baseline reaction time different to agree with versus disagree with dysfunctional attitudes. Model 3 adjusts for age, gender and baseline over-general memory.