Personality research has important implications for the prevention of depression. Meta-analytic evidence indicates that existing preventive interventions can reduce the incidence of depressive disorders by 25% (Cuijpers et al. 2008). However, the available strategies are a mix of universal (intervention is administered to the entire population), selective (to a well-defined at-risk group), and indicated (to those with subthreshold disorder) approaches. Universal interventions are costly, lack a personalized focus, and require very large samples to yield detectable effects, whereas indicated interventions may be better described as treatment than prevention (Muñoz et al. 2010). In contrast, selective interventions are true preventive measures that are cost effective and can be tailored to a specific mechanism of risk. However, implementation of selective strategies requires knowledge of risk factors and causal processes that lead from the vulnerability to the disorder.
