Psychodynamic Theories Of Depression: A Review Of Three Different Models

Perhaps there is as much disagreement on the aetiological issue of depression as on the question of its nosological status. This may be partly because aetiological inferences were made on the basis of inadequate or arbitraty nosological classifications and vice versa . Another reason that may explain this long dispute is the imprecise definition or meaning of the term depression. Indeed, the term depression denotes different things to clinicians and researchers of different theoretical persuasions. For those in the psychoanalytic tradition, depression refers more to an affect than to a clinical condition; for those with an organic orientation, depression is more than an affect-it refers to a clinical syndrome involving a wide spectrum of symptoms inclu- ding affective, cognitive, behavioral, and somatic symptoms. Besides the semantic confusion which surrounds this area of affective disorders, there is a lack of consensus on the research strategies that might be adopted in the study of depressive disorders. There are, as Akiskal and McKinney (1975) rightly point out, those who: "favour 'understanding' depression over objective description of observable signs and symptoms",