Depression research methodologies at the social-clinical interface: Still hazy after all these years

We agree fu I ly with Ingram and Hamilton's (this issue) call for greater methodological precision in social psychological studies of depression. Based on the response to previous calls for greater precision, however, we remain skeptical that their suggestions will be implemented. In this article we review depression articles published in the Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology between 1988 and 1998, and we conclude that few of the studies adhered to previous suggestions similar to those offered by Ingram and Hamilton. We then discuss four issues that we deem critical to depression research at the social-clinical interface: (a) the continuity between subsyndromal and syndromal depression; (b) the prediction of morbidity, mortality, and service utilization from depressive symptoms; (c) the significance of prior episodes of depression; and (d) questionnaire versus interview assessment of depression. We conclude that although few depression researchers at the social-clinical interface have applied previous recommendations for greater methodological precision, even modest attention to these recommendations could lead to important contributions to our understanding of the etiology, prevention, and treatment of depression.