In research and clinical practice, familial risk for depression and anxiety is often constructed as a simple Yes/No dichotomous family history (FH) indicator. However, this measure may not fully capture the liability to these conditions. This study investigated whether a continuous familial loading score (FLS), incorporating family- and disorder-specific characteristics (e.g. family size, prevalence of depression/anxiety), (i) is associated with a polygenic risk score (PRS) for major depression and with clinical/psychosocial vulnerabilities and (ii) still captures variation in clinical/psychosocial vulnerabilities after information on FH has been taken into account.

Data came from 1425 participants with lifetime depression and/or anxiety from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety. The Family Tree Inventory was used to determine FLS/FH indicators for depression and/or anxiety.

Persons with higher FLS had higher PRS for major depression, more severe depression and anxiety symptoms, higher disease burden, younger age of onset, and more neuroticism, rumination, and childhood trauma. Among these variables, FH was not associated with PRS, severity of symptoms, and neuroticism. After regression out the effect of FH from the FLS, the resulting residualized measure of FLS was still associated with severity of symptoms of depression and anxiety, rumination, and childhood trauma.

Familial risk for depression and anxiety deserves clinical attention due to its associated genetic vulnerability and more unfavorable disease profile, and seems to be better captured by a continuous score that incorporates family- and disorder-specific characteristics than by a dichotomous FH measure.

The psychosocial vulnerability model of hostility posits that hostile individuals, given their oppositional attitudes and behaviours, are more likely to have increased interpersonal conflicts, lower social support, more stressful life events (SL-E) and higher likelihood of depression. However, little research has tested this hypothesis using large-scale prospective samples. The present study aims to assess the predictive value of hostility for depressive mood.

Data are from 3399 participants in the Whitehall II cohort study, aged 35–55 years at baseline (phase 1 1985–1988). Cynical hostility was measured at phase 1. Depressive mood was assessed at phase 7 (2002–2004). Sociodemographic characteristics, health-related behaviours, common mental disorders and antidepressant medication intake were assessed at phase 1. SL-E and confiding/emotional support were measured at phases 1, 2 (1989–1990) and 5 (1997–1999).

Compared with participants in the lowest quartile of cynical hostility, those in the highest quartiles were more likely to have depressive mood [second quartile: odds ratio (OR) 1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14–2.20; third quartile: OR 2.78, 95% CI 2.03–3.77; fourth quartile: OR 4.66, 95% CI 3.41–6.36] in analysis adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics. This graded association was somewhat attenuated (⩽18%) but remained robust to adjustments for the covariates measured at baseline and follow-up. The association was also evident in participants free of mental health difficulties at baseline.

Cynical hostility is a strong and robust predictor of depressive mood. Consideration of personality characteristics may be crucial to the understanding and management of depression.