At the same time, past research does not explain whether the rumination–impulsivity relationship may vary by ruminative subtype, and whether these relationships have different con- sequences for suicide risk. If reflection is more adaptive than brooding, we should expect that the presence of reflection should mitigate the impact of brooding on impulsivity and on the impulsivity–suicide risk relationship. Thus, we sought to examine, via two studies, whether level of brooding in relation to reflection would be differentially related to behavioral and trait measures of impulsivity and whether impulsivity would statistically mediate the relation between ruminative subtypes and risk for suicidal behavior. Study 1 involved four groups of young adults pre-selected based on their level of brooding and reflection. We hypothesized that an overreliance on brooding (i.e., high levels of brooding without correspondingly high levels of reflection) as a response style would be most strongly associated with impulsivity, such that individuals high in brooding—but not in reflection— would exhibit higher impulsivity than would individuals high in reflection, individuals high in both brooding and reflection, and also compared to individuals low in both brooding and reflection. Study 2 involved a larger sample of individuals who completed self-report measures of rumination, impulsivity, and risk for suicidal behavior. We expected that an overreliance on brooding would be most strongly related to impulsivity and to risk for suicidal behavior and that impulsivity would explain the relation between brooding and risk for suicidal behavior. We also sought to determine whether reflection would attenuate the indirect re- lationship between brooding and risk for suicidal behavior
through impulsivity.