PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Self-Efficacy Pathways to Childhood Depression Albert Bandura Stanford University Concetta Pastorelli, Claudio Barbaranelli, and Gian Vittorio Caprara University of Rome, "La Sapienza" This prospective research analyzed how different facets of perceived self-efficacy operate in concert within a network of sociocognitive influences in childhood depression. Perceived social and academic inefficacy contributed to concurrent and subsequent depression both directly and through their impact on academic achievement, prosocialness, and problem behaviors. In the shorter run, children were depressed over beliefs in their academic inefficacy rather than over their actual academic performances. In the longer run, the impact of a low sense of academic efficacy on depression was mediated through academic achievement, problem behavior, and prior depression. Perceived social inefficacy had a heavier impact on depression in girls than in boys in the longer term. Depression was also more strongly linked over time for girls than for boys. Childhood depression is a matter of major concern because of its prevalence and impairment of functioning. Moreover, it often is not a transient phenomenon that children outgrow. Depressive episodes are recurrent if the contributing factors remain unabated. Early depressive vulnerability is, therefore, predictive of frequency and severity of depression in adulthood (Petersen et al., 1993). Rates of depression vary by ethnicity and culture, but women are generally more prone to depression than men. However, gender differences do not begin to emerge until late adolescence (Culbert- son, 1997; Nolen-Hoeksema & Girgus, 1994). Gender differences in susceptibility to depression have been attributed to a variety of factors, including sex role socialization, more stressors in women's lives, negatively biased self-systems, use of ruminative rather than active coping strategies, neurobiologic dysfunctions, and socio- structural constraints and impediments (Hammen, 1990; Nolen- Hoeksema, 1991; Petersen et al., 1993; Rehm, 1988). Although theories of depression differ in the particular de- terminants they feature, they generally subscribe to the diathesis-stress model as the guiding metatheory. Within this Albert Bandura, Department of Psychology, Stanford University; Con- cetta Pastorelli, Claudio Barbaranelli, and Gian Vittorio Caprara, Depart- ment of Psychology, University of Rome, "La Sapienza," Rome, Italy. The research reported in this article was supported by grants from the Grant Foundation, the Spencer Foundation, and the Johann Jacobs Foundation. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Albert Bandura, Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Jordan Hall, Building 420, Stanford, California 94305-2130; or to Gian Vittorio Ca- prara, Dipartimento di Psicologia, Universita Degli Studi di Roma, "La Sapienza," Via dei Marsi, 78, 00185 Rome, Italy. conceptual framework, external stressors constitute risk factors that act on personal predispositions to produce bouts of depres- sion. Depending on theoretical orientation, the diathesis or predispositions may be primarily cognitive, constitutional, or a blend of.these different types of susceptibilities. The diathesis- stress model is often combined with epidemiological risk-buffer models. Protective factors are posited as conditions that can buffer the adverse effects of stressors. This metatheory is heavily cast in reactive terms. Social cognitive theory posits an agentic model of depression in which individuals play a proactive role in their adaptation rather than simply undergo experiences through environmental stressors acting on their personal vulnerabilities. Within an agentic perspec- tive, positive contributors to successful adaptation represent en- ablement factors that operate proactively rather than just protective or sheltering factors. Protectiveness shields individuals from harsh realities or weakens their impact. Enablement equips them with the personal resources to select and structure their environments in ways that cultivate competencies and set a successful course for their lives. This is the difference between proactive recruitment of positive guidance and support for shaping one's life circumstances and reactive adaptation to them. At the intraindividual level, peo- ple are enabled rather than merely buffered by competencies and beliefs of personal efficacy. Among the mechanisms of human agency, none is more central or pervasive than people's beliefs in their efficacy to regulate their own functioning and to exercise control over events that affect their lives (Bandura, 1997). Perceived self-efficacy refers to beliefs in one's capabilities to produce given attainments. A sense of personal efficacy is the foundation of human agency. Unless people believe they can produce desired effects by their actions, they have little incentive to act or to persevere in the face of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999, Vol. 76, No. 2, 258-269 Copyright 1999 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0022-3514/99/S3.00 258