I couldn't find the actual paper with this press release, even when searching on the website itself (which ended up just returning blank pages to me for some re

I couldn't find the actual paper with this press release, even when searching on the website itself (which ended up just returning blank pages to me for some reason). I found more info through another website[0]. At least this helps me, in principle, rule out the idea that they could have been mixing correlation and causation. The one thing that surprises me is that they quickly go on to conclude that therapies should focus on what they studied. Quote: "Treatments for MDD, GAD, and PD should attempt to enhance perseverance and optimism." A predictor isn't necessarily an actuator. I think that a few steps are skipped if a predictor is immediately used as a tool to correct an issue rather than to primarily track it. They would need to do a separate study to know IF one possible new treatment can come out of training in "goal persistence". There are other ways to think about the results. For example, some of the criteria to diagnose a Major Depressive Disorder could be refined thanks to this kind of research. If a sort of "goal" or "persistence" assessment is tracked, the intensity of the disorder might be better perceived, which in turn could mean that therapists and psychiatrists could work towards more fitting treatment amongst what is already researched and known. In any case, as someone with a fairly intense mix of two of the disorders in this study, I am always happy to see some research come out (especially when n >> 3 undergrads who were passing by). [0] https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fabn0000428 https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fabn0000428