Self-efficacy in depression: Bridging the gap between competence and real-world functioning

Background: Depression is the largest contributing factor to years lost to disability, and symptom remission does not always result in functional improvement. Comprehensive analysis of functioning requires investigation both of the competence to perform behaviours, as well as actual performance in the real world. Further, two independent domains of functioning have been proposed: adaptive (behaviours conducive to daily living skills and independent functioning) and interpersonal (behaviours conducive to the successful initiation and maintenance of social relationships). To date, very little is known about the relationship between these constructs in depression, and the factors that may play a key role in the disparity between competence and real-world performance in adaptive and interpersonal functioning. Purpose: This study used a multidimensional (adaptive and interpersonal functioning), multi-level (competence and performance) approach to explore the potential discrepancy between competence and real-world performance in depression, specifically investigating whether self-efficacy (one’s beliefs of their capability to perform particular actions) predicts depressed individuals’ underperformance in the real world relative to their ability. A comparison sample of healthy participants was included to investigate the level of depressed individuals’ impairment, across variables, relative to healthy individuals. Method: Forty-two participants with depression and twenty healthy participants without history of, or current, psychiatric illness were recruited in the Kingston, Ontario community. Competence, self-efficacy, and real-world functioning all in both adaptive and interpersonal domains, and symptoms were assessed during a single-visit assessment. Results: Relative to healthy individuals, depressed individuals showed significantly poorer adaptive and interpersonal competence, adaptive and interpersonal functioning, and significantly lower self-efficacy for adaptive and interpersonal behaviours. Self-efficacy significantly predicted functional disability both in the domain of adaptive and interpersonal functioning. Interpersonal self-efficacy accounted for significant variance in the discrepancy between interpersonal competence and functioning. Conclusions: The current study provides the first data regarding relationships among competence, functioning, and self-efficacy in depression. Self-efficacy may play an important role in the deployment of functional skills in everyday life. This has implications for therapeutic interventions aimed at enhancing depressed individuals’ engagement in functional activities. There may be additional intrinsic or extrinsic factors that influence the relationships among competence and functioning in depression.

A Group-Enhanced Sprint Interval Training Program for Amateur Athletes

Sprint interval training (SIT) can elicit improvements in aerobic and anaerobic capacity. While variations in SIT protocols have been investigated, the influence of social processes cannot be overlooked. As research supports the use of groups to influence individual cognitions and behaviours, the current project assessed the effectiveness of a group-based intervention with participants conducting SIT. Specifically, 53 amateur athletes (age, 21.9 ± 2.9 years; 53% females) took part in a 4-week training program (3 sessions per week, 30-s “all-out” efforts with 4 min active recovery, repeated 4–6 times per session), and were assigned to “true group”, aggregate, or individual conditions. Results indicated no significant differences between groups for the physiological measures. With regards to training improvements from baseline for all participants— regardless of condition — significant main effects for time were identified for maximal oxygen uptake (2.5–2.8 mL·kg−1·min−1, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.03), time-trial performance (14–32 s, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.37), and anaerobic power (1.1–1.7 k·h−1, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.66). With regards to the psychological measures, significant main effects between groups were found for motivation (p = 0.033, η2 = 0.13), task self-efficacy (p = 0.018, η2 = 0.15), and scheduling self-efficacy (p = 0.003, η2 = 0.22). The true group experienced greater improvements in motivation than the individual condition, but the aggregate and individual conditions demonstrated greater increases in task and scheduling self-efficacy. Though the SIT paradigm employed induced training improvements similar to previous work, the group intervention was not able to further these improvements