Belief Updating Deficits in Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials
Systematic review and meta-analysis of 29 studies (graded 1 by design analogy)
PubMed 41033262 · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2025.102649
What was done
Preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis of five electronic databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) examining depressive symptoms and alterations in belief updating to both positive and negative information. The review included 29 papers (N = 3,130 individuals). Risk of bias was evaluated with an adapted Downs and Black checklist, publication bias was assessed via funnel plots, Egger's test, and trim-and-fill procedure, and pooled effect sizes were calculated using random-effects models.
What was found
Depressive symptoms showed a small, statistically significant association with deficits in belief updating to positive information (r = -0.11), but not to negative information. Between-study heterogeneity was low for both models. Exploratory subgroup analyses showed significant differences in updating-to-positive based on the experimental paradigm used, but not for updating-to-negative. Risk of bias was low and no evidence of publication bias was found.
Why it matters
This meta-analysis clarifies conflicting literature by showing that belief-updating deficits in depression are valence-specific, selectively impairing the integration of positive disconfirming information.
Limits
The summary effect size is small (r = -0.11), explaining minimal variance. The abstract does not report confidence intervals, exact p-values, participant diagnostic status (clinical depression vs. subclinical symptoms), or causal directionality.
Cited by
- supports Cognitive rigidity and a reduced ability to recognize positive moments are key components of depression.