Abstract
Worry and rumination are two forms of repetitive negative thoughts. Prior studies have identified similarities and differences between these two states. For a more comprehensive understanding of these thought processes, researchers need reliable methods to induce them experimentally. Traditionally, researchers have used either scripted or personalized approaches to trigger worry and rumination, but it remains unclear which method is more effective. Additionally, the potential impact of preexisting disorders like generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) or major depression (MDD) on these inductions is not well understood. This study aimed to compare scripted and personalized induction methods to identify which was more effective for eliciting worry and rumination, while also considering the potential influence of generalized anxiety and depression. Participants (N = 355) included individuals with GAD, depression, or healthy controls. They were randomly assigned to either scripted or personalized induction tasks designed to induce worry or rumination. Findings revealed that personalized induction methods were consistently more effective than scripted methods for inducing both worry and rumination, regardless of participants' group characteristics. In addition to the general underperformance of scripted induction methods, the scripted rumination induction was notably less successful, failing to induce rumination to a greater extent than the scripted worry induction. Given these findings, personalized approaches are recommended for experimental studies that aim to compare worry and rumination. Limitations of the study and implications for future research are also discussed.