We examined whether affective forecasting biases prospectively predict depression and anxiety symptoms in the context of life stress. Participants (n = 72) completed– baseline measures of depression, anxiety, and mood predictions, followed by one week of ecological momentary assessments of mood. Three months later, they completed measures of depression, anxiety, and life stress. Neither positive nor negative mood prediction biases at baseline were associated with follow-up anxiety scores. Positive mood prediction biases were not associated with follow-up depression scores. However, the interaction between negative mood prediction bias and life stress predicted follow-up depression scores. Under conditions of greater life stress, stronger negative mood prediction biases predicted lower follow-up depression scores. Under conditions of positive life change, stronger negative mood prediction biases predicted higher follow-up depression scores. Negative mood prediction bias might serve as a protective or liability factor, depending on levels of stress. Clinical implications and future directions are discussed.

中文翻译：

---

情感预测偏差：责任还是保护因素？

我们研究了在生活压力的背景下，情感预测偏见是否可以预测抑郁和焦虑症状。参与者（n = 72）已完成–抑郁，焦虑和情绪预测的基线测量，然后进行了为期一周的生态瞬时情绪评估。三个月后，他们完成了抑郁，焦虑和生活压力的测量。基线时的积极或消极情绪预测偏差均与随访焦虑评分无关。积极的情绪预测偏差与随访抑郁评分无关。但是，负面情绪预测偏见与生活压力预测的后续抑郁评分之间的相互作用。在生活压力更大的情况下，较强的负面情绪预测偏差会预测较低的后续抑郁评分。在积极的生活变化条件下，较差的负面情绪预测偏见可预测较高的随访抑郁评分。负面的情绪预测偏差可能是保护因素或责任因素，具体取决于压力水平。临床意义和未来的方向进行了讨论。