The magnitude of neurocognitive impairment is overestimated in depression: the role of motivation, debilitating momentary influences, and the overreliance on mean differences

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses agree that depression is characterized by neurocognitive dysfunctions relative to nonclinical controls. These deficits allegedly stem from impairments in functionally corresponding brain areas. Increasingly, studies suggest that some performance deficits are in part caused by negative task-taking attitudes such as poor motivation or the presence of distracting symptoms. A pilot study confirmed that these factors mediate neurocognitive deficits in depression. The validity of these results is however questionable given they were based solely on self-report measures. The present study addresses this caveat by having examiners assess influences during a neurocognitive examination, which were concurrently tested for their predictive value on performance. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with depression and 36 healthy controls were assessed on a battery of neurocognitive tests. The examiner completed the Impact on Performance Scale, a questionnaire evaluating mediating influences that may impact performance. RESULTS: On average, patients performed worse than controls at a large effect size. When the total score of the Impact on Performance Scale was accounted for by mediation analysis and analyses of covariance, group differences were reduced to a medium effect size. A total of 30% of patients showed impairments of at least one standard deviation below the mean. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that neurocognitive impairment in depression is likely overestimated; future studies should consider fair test-taking conditions. We advise researchers to report percentages of patients showing performance deficits rather than relying solely on overall group differences. This prevents fostering the impression that the majority of patients exert deficits, when in fact deficits are only true for a subgroup.