Original title: Questionable mediated effect of self-efficacy on depressive symptoms among college students: A reassessment of Desai and Lueke (2026)
Kimmo Sorjonen, Bo Melin, Marika Melin · September 2026
Psychology researchers often try to show how one mental trait causes another. In an earlier study, researchers proposed a chain reaction linking generalized self-efficacy—a person's belief in their ability to succeed—to depressive symptoms in college students. The authors of this paper reanalyzed that original data. They found that a completely different model fits the numbers just as well. Instead of a step-by-step chain, all the measured traits—self-efficacy, perceived stress, college maladjustment, and depressive symptoms—can simply reflect one overarching trait called core self-evaluation. This reveals a major challenge with observational data: the same patterns can support multiple competing theories. Researchers cannot rely on simple correlations alone to claim that one specific psychological sequence is the correct one.
Imagine you see that people who carry umbrellas are less often wet. You might think carrying an umbrella stops you getting wet. But a different explanation is that rainy weather makes people both carry umbrellas and get wet anyway. The data—umbrellas and dryness—fits both stories. Here, the original claim is that self-confidence reduces stress, which reduces depression. But an equally good explanation is that a single trait, like overall emotional strength, makes someone report both more confidence and less depression. The numbers alone cannot tell which story is true.
Many psychological studies claim that one trait causes another based on survey correlations. This paper shows that the same numbers can support a completely different story—for example, that all measured traits reflect a single underlying factor. Researchers and readers should not mistake such correlations for proof of how one thing leads to another.
The abstract notes that observational data alone cannot distinguish between the two models. The alternative model is not proven correct; it merely fits equally well. The reanalysis is limited to the original covariance matrix and does not test all conceivable models. No experimental or longitudinal data is introduced.
Ask anything about this paper. Answers come from its abstract, and say so when the abstract doesn't cover your question.
Questionable mediated effect of self-efficacy on depressive symptoms among college students: A reassessment of Desai and Lueke (2026) — Kimmo Sorjonen, Bo Melin, Marika Melin — PsyArXiv — doi:10.31234/osf.io/9765b_v1
Abstract licence: CC BY
Explanation generated by Synthesis from the abstract — it is not the original paper. This is a preprint, so it hasn't necessarily been peer reviewed.