Email Alert | RSS

Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) ›› 2023, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (3): 385-391. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2023.03.001

    Next Articles

Urban-rural differentials in the relationship between personality traits and changes in depressive symptoms

Ting WANG,Qiao-sheng LI,Hao-ran LIU,Wei-yan JIAN*()   

  1. Department of Health Policy and Management, Peking University School of Public Health, Beijing 100191, China
  • Received:2023-02-16 Online:2023-06-18 Published:2023-06-12
  • Contact: Wei-yan JIAN E-mail:jianweiyan@bjmu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    the Major Program of the National Social Science Foundation of China(22 & ZD143)

RICH HTML

   

PDF (PC)

Abstract:

Objective: The prevalence of depressive symptoms has become a significant public health issue in China. Research on the relationship between personality traits and changes in depressive symptoms, as well as further exploration of urban-rural differences, not only benefits for the understanding of the prevalence trend of depression in China, but also provides a useful reference for the government to develop personalized mental health prevention strategies. Methods: Based on the data from the China Family Panel Studies in 2018 and 2020, a univariate analysis was conducted on 16 198 Chinese residents aged 18 years and above. Five dimensions of personality traits were conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism and openness. In the study, 16 198 residents were divided into "keep good group", "better group", "worse group" and "keep bad group" according to the changes in depressive symptoms in 2018 and 2020. After controlling for factors, such as gender and education, multinomial Logistic regression analysis was used to examine whether personality traits were associated with changes in depressive symptoms. In addition, we evaluated whether urban-rural and personality traits interacted to influence depressive symptoms. Results: The five dimensions of personality traits were significantly correlated with changes in depressive symptoms. Conscientiousness, extroversion, and agreeableness were negatively associated with depressive symptoms, while neuroticism and openness were positively related. Urban and rural differences moderated the relationship between personality traits and depressive symptoms. Compared with urban residents, rural residents showed stronger correlations between neuroticism (OR=1.14; 95%CI: 1.00-1.30) and the group of depression-recovery, as well as conscientiousness (OR=0.79;95%CI: 0.68-0.93) and the group of persistent-depression. Conclusion: The study finds that personality traits have a significant correlation with changes in depressive symptoms, with certain traits showing a negative or positive relationship. Specifically, higher levels of conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness are associated with lower levels of depressive symptoms, while higher levels of neuroticism and openness are associated with higher levels of depressive symptoms. In addition, the study finds that rural residents have a stronger association between their personality traits and persistent or improved depressive symptoms, which highlights the need for tailoring mental health intervention and prevention programs that should take into account personality traits and urban-rural differences in China. By developing targeted strategies that are sensitive to personality differences and geographic disparities, policymakers and mental health professionals can help prevent and reduce the incidence of depressive symptoms, ultimately improving the overall well-being of Chinese adults. Meanwhile, additional studies in independent populations are needed to corroborate the findings of this study.

Key words: Depressive symptoms, Urban-rural differentials, Personality traits, Chinese adults

CLC Number: 

  • R190

Table 1

Sociological-demographic characteristics of the sample"

Characteristics n (%) Rural, n Urban, n P
Gender
  Female 8 178 (50.49) 3 906 4 272 0.077
  Male 8 020 (49.51) 3 942 4 078
Age/years
  18-30 2 338 (14.43) 1 019 1 319 < 0.001
  >30-45 4 512 (27.86) 2 012 2 500
  >45 9 348 (57.71) 4 817 4 531
Marital status
  Married 13 955 (86.15) 6 874 7 081 < 0.001
  Unmarried 2 243 (13.85) 974 1 269
Working status
  Unemployed 3 501 (21.61) 1 216 2 285 < 0.001
  Employed 12 697 (78.39) 6 632 6 065
Education
  Primary school 6 392 (39.46) 4 098 2 294 < 0.001
  Middle school 5 010 (30.93) 2 459 2 551
  High school 3 805 (23.49) 1 139 2 666
  College degree or above 991 (6.12) 152 839
Chronic diseases
  No 13 448 (83.02) 6 478 6 970 0.115
  Yes 2 750 (16.98) 1 370 1 380
Self-evaluated income status
  Low 1 730 (10.68) 826 904 < 0.001
  Low-middle 2 854 (17.62) 1 278 1 576
  Middle 7 860 (48.52) 3 634 4 226
  Middle-high 2 116 (13.06) 1 097 1 019
  High 1 638 (10.12) 1 013 625
Self-reported health status
  Very good 2 124 (13.11) 979 1 145 < 0.001
  Quite good 7 017 (43.32) 3 099 3 918
  Good 2 326 (14.36) 1 120 1 206
  General 2 161 (13.34) 1 192 969
  Bad 2 570 (15.87) 1 458 1 112
Depression status (2018)
  Depression 4 858 (29.99) 2 544 2 314 < 0.001
  Healthy 11 340 (70.01) 5 304 6 036
Depression status (2020)
  Depression 5 495 (33.92) 2 889 2 606 < 0.001
  Healthy 10 703 (66.08) 4 959 5 744
Total 16 198 7 848 8 350

Table 2

Analysis results of risk factors on depression status"

Characteristics Keep good, n Better, n Worse, n Keep bad, n P
Gender
  Female 3 663 1 324 1 639 1 552 < 0.001
  Male 4 676 1 040 1 362 942
Township
  Rural 3 805 1 223 1 499 1 321 < 0.001
  Urban 4 534 1 141 1 502 1 173
Age/years
  18-30 1 260 343 441 294 < 0.001
  >30-45 2 491 630 816 575
  >45 4 588 1 391 1 744 1 625
Marital status
  Married 7 311 2 006 2 595 2 043 < 0.001
  Unmarried 1 028 358 406 451
Working status
  Unemployed 1 701 506 649 645 < 0.001
  Employed 6 638 1 858 2 352 1 849
Education
  Primary school 2 886 1 006 1 274 1 226 < 0.001
  Middle school 2 712 712 907 679
  High school 2 158 509 653 485
  College degree or above 583 137 167 104
Chronic diseases
  No 7 266 1 870 2 468 1 844 < 0.001
  Yes 1 073 494 533 650
Self-evaluated income status
  Low 743 271 363 353 < 0.001
  Low-middle 1 361 433 581 479
  Middle 4 277 1 116 1 367 1 100
  Middle-high 1 153 281 374 308
  High 805 263 316 254
Self-reported health status
  Very good 1 038 318 426 342 < 0.001
  Quite good 3 731 1 049 1 279 958
  Good 1 425 276 412 213
  General 1 323 265 369 204
  Bad 822 456 515 777
Personality traits
  Conscientiousness - - - - < 0.001
  Extraversion - - - - < 0.001
  Openness - - - - < 0.001
  Neuroticism - - - - < 0.001
  Agreeableness - - - - < 0.001
Total 8 339 2 364 3 001 2 494

Table 3

Results of multinominal logistic regression analysis on the relationship between personality traits and changes in depression symptoms"

Characteristics Better Worse Keep bad
ORa 95%CI ORa 95%CI ORa 95%CI
Township (Ref: Urban)
  Rural 1.19*** 1.08-1.31 1.10 1.01-1.21 1.19*** 1.08-1.31
Gender (Ref: Female)
  Male 0.63*** 0.57-0.70 0.67*** 0.61-0.73 0.51*** 0.46-0.56
Age (Ref: 18-30)/years
  30-45 1.20 0.99-1.55 1.01 0.86-1.26 1.49* 1.15-1.92
  > 45 1.18 0.98-1.45 0.82 0.68-1.01 1.36 0.99-1.76
Marital status(Ref: Unmarried)
  Married 1.41*** 1.23-1.62 1.20** 1.05-1.36 1.83*** 1.61-2.09
Work conditions(Ref: Unemployed)
  Employed 1.12 0.99-1.27 1.08 0.96-1.21 1.03 0.92-1.16
Education(Ref: Primary)
  Middle school 0.88* 0.78-0.99 0.84** 0.76-0.94 0.78*** 0.70-0.88
  High school 0.81** 0.70-0.93 0.78*** 0.69-0.88 0.71*** 0.62-0.82
  College degree or above 0.82 0.66-1.03 0.76** 0.61-0.93 0.59*** 0.46-0.76
Chronic diseases(Ref: No)
  Yes 1.39*** 1.22-1.58 1.19** 1.05-1.35 1.40*** 1.24-1.59
Self-evaluated incomestatus (Ref: Low)
  Low-middle 0.92 0.76-1.11 0.89 0.75-1.05 0.85 0.71-1.01
  Middle 0.77** 0.65-0.92 0.69*** 0.59-0.80 0.67*** 0.57-0.78
  Middle-high 0.71*** 0.58-0.87 0.69*** 0.58-0.83 0.67*** 0.55-0.81
  High 0.87 0.70-1.07 0.78* 0.64-0.94 0.66*** 0.54-0.82
Self-reported health status(Ref: Bad)
  Very good 0.65*** 0.54-0.77 0.72*** 0.61-0.85 0.43*** 0.37-0.51
  Quite good 0.61*** 0.52-0.70 0.64*** 0.56-0.74 0.36*** 0.32-0.41
  Good 0.41*** 0.34-0.50 0.54*** 0.46-0.64 0.21*** 0.18-0.26
  General 0.40*** 0.33-0.48 0.51*** 0.43-0.61 0.21*** 0.17-0.25
Personality traits
  Conscientiousness 1.02 0.94-1.11 0.91* 0.84-0.98 0.94 0.86-1.02
  Extraversion 1.01 0.94-1.07 0.99 0.94-1.04 0.90*** 0.85-0.96
  Openness 1.10** 1.03-1.17 1.06* 1.00-1.12 1.18*** 1.11-1.26
  Neuroticism 1.32*** 1.23-1.41 1.24*** 1.16-1.31 1.45*** 1.35-1.57
  Agreeableness 1.03 0.94-1.13 0.89** 0.83-0.96 0.93 0.85-1.01
Constant 0.69* 0.50-0.94 0.94 0.70-1.26 1.27 0.93-1.74

Table 4

Regression results of the interaction effect between urban-rural disparity and personality traits on the changes in depression symptoms"

Characteristics Better Worse Keep bad
ORa 95%CI ORa 95%CI ORa 95%CI
Township
  Rural 1.24*** 1.13-1.36 1.17*** 1.07-1.27 1.30*** 1.19-1.43
Personality traits
  Conscientiousness 1.02 0.91-1.15 0.89* 0.80-0.98 0.98 0.87-1.09
  Extraversion 1.00 0.92-1.09 0.97 0.90-1.05 0.89** 0.82-0.96
  Openness 1.06 0.98-1.16 1.02 0.94-1.10 1.07 0.98-1.17
  Neuroticism 1.28*** 1.17-1.41 1.23*** 1.13-1.34 1.48*** 1.34-1.64
  Agreeableness 1.02 0.90-1.14 0.95 0.86-1.05 0.93 0.83-1.04
  Township × conscientiousness 0.91 0.77-1.08 0.98 0.85-1.13 0.79** 0.68-0.93
  Township × extraversion 1.00 0.89-1.13 1.05 0.94-1.16 1.02 0.91-1.15
  Township × openness 0.92 0.82-1.05 0.94 0.84-1.04 0.92 0.81-1.04
  Township × neuroticism 1.14* 1.00-1.30 1.09 0.96-1.23 1.11 0.96-1.28
  Township × agreeableness 1.07 0.90-1.28 0.90 0.78-1.04 1.10 0.93-1.31
Constant 0.25*** 0.24-0.27 0.34*** 0.32-0.36 0.26*** 0.24-0.28
1 过伟峰, 曹晓岚, 盛蕾, 等. 抑郁症中西医结合诊疗专家共识[J]. 中国中西医结合杂志, 2020, 40 (2): 141- 148.
2 Liu QQ , He HR , Yang J , et al. Changes in the global burden of depression from 1990 to 2017: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease study[J]. J Psychiatr Res, 2020, 126, 134- 140.
doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.08.002
3 Markon KE , Krueger RF , Watson D . Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: An integrative hierarchical approach[J]. J Pers Soc Psychol, 2005, 88 (1): 139- 157.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.139
4 Chioqueta AP , Stiles TC . Personality traits and the development of depression, hopelessness, and suicide ideation[J]. Pers Indivd Dif, 2005, 38 (6): 1283- 1291.
doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2004.08.010
5 Fournier J , Jones N , Chase H , et al. Personality dysfunction in depression and individual differences in effortful emotion regulation[J]. Biol Psychiatry, 2017, 81 (Suppl 10): S336- S337.
6 Naragon-Gainey K , Watson D . Consensually defined facets of personality as prospective predictors of change in depression symptoms[J]. Assessment, 2014, 21 (4): 387- 403.
doi: 10.1177/1073191114528030
7 Panaite V , Rottenberg J , Bylsma LM . Daily affective dynamics predict depression symptom trajectories among adults with major and minor depression[J]. Affec Sci, 2020, 1 (3): 186- 198.
doi: 10.1007/s42761-020-00014-w
8 李磊, 马孟园, 彭红叶, 等. 中国农村地区老年人抑郁症状发生情况及影响因素研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2021, 24 (27): 3432- 3438.
doi: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.00.577
9 张海钟. 人格心理的城乡跨文化实证研究十年成果综述[J]. 社科纵横, 2006, 21 (3): 125- 127.
10 肖凌燕. 基于"大五"人格理论的大学生人格结构分析[J]. 黑龙江教育(高教研究与评估), 2011, (9): 27- 29.
11 Radloff LS . The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population[J]. Appl Psychol Meas, 1977, 1 (3): 385- 401.
doi: 10.1177/014662167700100306
12 Feeney J , Kenny R . Aair cortisol as a risk marker for increased depressive symptoms among older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic[J]. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 2022, 143, 105847.
doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2022.105847
13 Hahn E , Gottschling J , Spinath FM . Short measurements of personality: Validity and reliability of the GSOEP Big Five Inventory (BFI-S)[J]. J Res Pers, 2012, 46 (3): 355- 359.
doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.03.008
14 Smith KA , Barstead MG , Rubin KH . Neuroticism and conscientiousness as moderators of the relation between social withdrawal and internalizing problems in adolescence[J]. J Youth Adolesc, 2017, 46 (4): 772- 786.
doi: 10.1007/s10964-016-0594-z
15 Guo P , Cui J , Wang Y , et al. Spontaneous microstates related to effects of low socioeconomic status on neuroticism[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10 (1): 1- 8.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-56847-4
16 Khoo S , Simms LJ . Links between depression and openness and its facets[J]. Personal Ment Health, 2018, 12 (3): 203- 215.
doi: 10.1002/pmh.1417
17 Kim SE , Kim HN , Cho J , et al. Direct and indirect effects of five factor personality and gender on depressive symptoms mediated by perceived stress[J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11 (4): e0154140.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154140
18 Chen J , Qiu L , Ho MHR . A meta-analysis of linguistic markers of extraversion: Positive emotion and social process words[J]. J Res Pers, 2020, 89, 104035.
doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2020.104035
19 Seligman ME . Fall into helplessness[J]. Psychol Today, 1973, 7 (1): 43- 48.
20 Verheij RA . Explaining urban-rural variations in health: A review of interactions between individual and environment[J]. Soc Sci Med, 1996, 42 (6): 923- 935.
doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00190-5
21 常韵琪, 郑晓, 李咪咪, 等. 老年慢性病患者抑郁状态及影响因素城乡差异研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2021, 24 (10): 1254- 1259.
22 Hyde JS , Mezulis AH , Abramson LY . The ABCs of depression: Integrating affective, biological, and cognitive models to explain the emergence of the gender difference in depression[J]. Psychol Rev, 2008, 115 (2): 291- 313.
23 Guo J , Guan LD , Fang LM , et al. Depression among Chinese older adults: A perspective from Hukou and health inequities[J]. J Affect Disord, 2017, 223, 115- 120.
24 Fang MW , Mirutse G , Guo L , et al. Role of socioeconomic status and housing conditions in geriatric depression in rural China: A cross-sectional study[J]. BMJ Open, 2019, 9 (5): e024046.
[1] Chun-su ZHU,Zhi-wei LIAN,Yi-min CUI. Association between depression and chronic diseases among middle-aged and older Chinese adults [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(4): 606-611.
[2] Zi-wei ZHANG,Yu-meng HUA,Ai-ping LIU. Joint association of depression symptoms and 10-year risk of ischemic cardiovascular disease with the cardiovascular disease in middle-aged and elderly people in China [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(3): 465-470.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Copyright © Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), All Rights Reserved.
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd