Commentaries

As reflected in the title of Coyne's (1976b) article Toward an Interactional Description of Depression, his formulation was meant as an incompletely theorized description of processes linking depression to its interpersonal context and not as a definitive fonnal model (Coyne, 1999). The past two decades have seen a burgeoning of empirical investigations adopting an interactional perspective in exploring the context of distress and depression. Joiner and his colleagues have provided the impetus for some of the most creative of this research, and we applaud the enthusiasm and the perseverance this group has shown in extending and refining Coyne's original theoretical statement. Coyne's initial test of hypotheses, derived from his interpersonal perspective (Coyne, 1 976a), failed to identify exactly what depressed persons did that led to rejection and mood induction in those with whom they interacted. In passing, Coyne offered some post hoc speculation that the nonreciprocal disclosure of intimate problems by depressed persons might be the source of these effects. He did not pursue this question further, but others reported mixed findings (Jacobson & Anderson, 1982; Lynn & Bates, 1985). This suggested that high disclosure was not solely responsible for the response of others. For a time, too much of the work that followed consisted of little more than cookie-cutter variations on the original Coyne (1976a) study. However, in recent years, Joiner and colleagues have promoted the notion that reassurance-seeking is responsible for the effects of distressed and depressed persons on others. In a series of studies, they tested Coyne's (1976b) initial hypothesis that depressed persons engage in supportseeking that leads to their rejection (e.g., Joiner, 1994; Joiner, Alfano, & Metalsky, 1992). Based on this research, the authors have been successful in establishing that reassurance-seeking is a discernible feature of the interpersonal behavior associated with distress and depression. In their target article, Joiner, Metalsky, Katz, and Beach (this issue) argue that reassurance-seeking can be viewed both as a vulnerability factor for depression and as an explanation of depression's consequences. Our commentary identifies some specific challenges to establishing reassurance-seeking in each of these two roles. With some open-minded skepticism, we raise several issues with an interest in opening a larger discussion of how an interpersonal description of depression can best be developed.