The role of neuroticism in self-harm and suicidal ideation: results from two UK population-based cohorts

BACKGROUND

Self-harm is common, debilitating and associated with completed suicide and increased all-cause mortality, but there is uncertainty about its causal risk factors, limiting risk assessment and effective management. Neuroticism is a stable personality trait associated with self-harm and suicidal ideation, and correlated with coping styles, but its value as an independent predictor of these outcomes is disputed.

METHODS

Prior history of hospital-treated self-harm was obtained by record-linkage to administrative health data in Generation Scotland:Scottish Family Health Study (N = 15,798; self-harm cases = 339) and by a self-report variable in UK Biobank (N = 35,227; self-harm cases = 772). Neuroticism in both cohorts was measured using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Short Form. Associations of neuroticism with self-harm were tested using multivariable regression following adjustment for age, sex, cognitive ability, educational attainment, socioeconomic deprivation, and relationship status. A subset of GS:SFHS was followed-up with suicidal ideation elicited by self-report (n = 3342, suicidal ideation cases = 158) and coping styles measured by the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations. The relationship of neuroticism to suicidal ideation, and the role of coping style, was then investigated using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Neuroticism was positively associated with hospital-associated self-harm in GS:SFHS (per EPQ-SF unit odds ratio 1.2 95% credible interval 1.1-1.2, p_FDR 0.0003) and UKB (per EPQ-SF unit odds ratio 1.1 95% confidence interval 1.1-1.2, p_FDR 9.8 × 10^-17). Neuroticism, and the neuroticism-correlated coping style, emotion-oriented coping (EoC), were also associated with suicidal ideation in multivariable models.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuroticism is an independent predictor of hospital-treated self-harm risk. Neuroticism and emotion-orientated coping styles are also predictive of suicidal ideation.

Genetic risk of major depressive disorder: the moderating and mediating effects of neuroticism and psychological resilience on clinical and self-reported depression

BACKGROUND

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for depression correlate with depression status and chronicity, and provide causal anchors to identify depressive mechanisms. Neuroticism is phenotypically and genetically positively associated with depression, whereas psychological resilience demonstrates negative phenotypic associations. Whether increased neuroticism and reduced resilience are downstream mediators of genetic risk for depression, and whether they contribute independently to risk remains unknown.

METHODS

Moderating and mediating relationships between depression PRS, neuroticism, resilience and both clinical and self-reported depression were examined in a large, population-based cohort, Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (N = 4166), using linear regression and structural equation modelling. Neuroticism and resilience were measured by the Eysenck Personality Scale Short Form Revised and the Brief Resilience Scale, respectively.

RESULTS

PRS for depression was associated with increased likelihood of self-reported and clinical depression. No interaction was found between PRS and neuroticism, or between PRS and resilience. Neuroticism was associated with increased likelihood of self-reported and clinical depression, whereas resilience was associated with reduced risk. Structural equation modelling suggested the association between PRS and self-reported and clinical depression was mediated by neuroticism (43-57%), while resilience mediated the association in the opposite direction (37-40%). For both self-reported and clinical diagnoses, the genetic risk for depression was independently mediated by neuroticism and resilience.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest polygenic risk for depression increases vulnerability for self-reported and clinical depression through independent effects on increased neuroticism and reduced psychological resilience. In addition, two partially independent mechanisms - neuroticism and resilience - may form part of the pathway of vulnerability to depression.

Intelligence and neuroticism in relation to depression and psychological distress: Evidence from two large population cohorts

Background

Neuroticism is a risk factor for selected mental and physical illnesses and is inversely associated with intelligence. Intelligence appears to interact with neuroticism and mitigate its detrimental effects on physical health and mortality. However, the inter-relationships of neuroticism and intelligence for major depressive disorder (MDD) and psychological distress has not been well examined.

Methods

Associations and interactions between neuroticism and general intelligence (g) on MDD, self-reported depression, and psychological distress were examined in two population-based cohorts: Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (GS:SFHS, n = 19,200) and UK Biobank (n = 90,529). The Eysenck Personality Scale Short Form-Revised measured neuroticism and g was extracted from multiple cognitive ability tests in each cohort. Family structure was adjusted for in GS:SFHS.

Results

Neuroticism was strongly associated with increased risk for depression and higher psychological distress in both samples. Although intelligence conferred no consistent independent effects on depression, it did increase the risk for depression across samples once neuroticism was adjusted for. Results suggest that higher intelligence may ameliorate the association between neuroticism and self-reported depression although no significant interaction was found for clinical MDD. Intelligence was inversely associated with psychological distress across cohorts. A small interaction was found across samples such that lower psychological distress associates with higher intelligence and lower neuroticism, although effect sizes were small.

Conclusions

From two large cohort studies, our findings suggest intelligence acts a protective factor in mitigating the effects of neuroticism on psychological distress. Intelligence does not confer protection against diagnosis of depression in those high in neuroticism.