Processes, not verdicts
Psychology research
The psychology side of the library includes longitudinal rumination work, a habit review, Gross’s emotion-regulation framework, prospect theory, and a review of CBT meta-analyses. Together they support process-level claims. They do not turn this website into a clinic.
Written by MIND editorial · Reviewed 2026-08-14 · Updated 2026-08-14
Definition
Curated psychological sources used to explain learning, attention, emotion, and behavior-change research.
What researchers studied: response styles, context-response habits, decision under risk, regulation strategies, and clinical trial packages. What they found is not a personal protocol.
In simple terms
These papers help name mechanisms. They do not name your disorder.
Scientific explanation
Study types differ: experiments, reviews, meta-analyses, longitudinal surveys. We show type, population, finding, and limitation on every citation card.
What research shows
Rumination as a maintaining process; habits as context-response learning; patterned decision biases; regulation as a sequence; CBT effects in trials with variation by condition.
What the research does not prove
That reading MIND is CBT, or that a matching word in your journal is a diagnosis.
What remains uncertain
How any one life maps onto trial samples.
Practical implications
Borrow the questions the papers imply (what is reinforced, what is rehearsed). Leave treatment to licensed care.
Educational only — not a diagnosis, not a treatment plan, not a crisis service.
Related mechanisms
- rumination
- habit
- regulation
- choice
Questions
Is CBT proven for my problem?
Hofmann and colleagues reviewed meta-analyses across conditions. Effects vary. Trial samples are not website users. Efficacy is not a personal prescription.
Sources
Only papers with a DOI or PMID in MIND’s reviewed store. Limitations are part of the citation.
The role of rumination in depressive disorders and mixed anxiety/depressive symptoms (2000)
Nolen-Hoeksema, Morrow, and colleagues · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · longitudinal · Community adults
Finding. A ruminative response style predicted later distress, supporting rumination as a maintaining process.
Limitation. Self-report; does not establish a single neural mechanism.
DOI 10.1037/0021-843X.109.3.504 · PMID 10847211 Source
Psychology of habit (2016)
Wood and Rünger · Annual Review of Psychology · systematic-review · Human behavioral research
Finding. Habits form through repetition in stable contexts and can persist when goals change.
Limitation. Laboratory and field literatures do not cover every everyday habit equally.
DOI 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033417 · PMID 26361052 Source
The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review (1998)
Gross · Review of General Psychology · theoretical · Psychological literature
Finding. Regulation can be described as a sequence of intervention points with different costs and effects.
Limitation. Framework paper; later experiments qualify strategy effectiveness by context.
DOI 10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271 Source
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk (1979)
Kahneman and Tversky · Econometrica · experimental · Human choice experiments
Finding. Choices systematically depart from expected-utility predictions, including loss aversion relative to a reference point.
Limitation. Laboratory choices; not a theory of every life decision.
DOI 10.2307/1914185 Source
The Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Review of Meta-analyses (2012)
Hofmann, Asnaani, Vonk, Sawyer, and Fang · Cognitive Therapy and Research · meta-analysis · Clinical trial samples across conditions
Finding. CBT shows robust effects for many problems in clinical trials, with variation by condition and comparison.
Limitation. Trial populations are not website users; efficacy is not a personal prescription.
DOI 10.1007/s10608-012-9476-1 · PMID 23459093 Source