Cited by 20Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesSchizophrenia research and treatment

Adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and early maladaptive schemas

Open access
Kiraz, Seda, Sertçelik, Sencan·2021·Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy

Abstract

The purpose of the current study is to present the early maladaptive schemas in adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The study sample comprised 107 participants, including 55 adult ADHD and 52 healthy volunteers. The age of the participants ranged between 18 and 32 years. Structured Clinical Interview Form for DSM-IV Axis I (SCID-I) and Structured Clinical Interview Form for DSM-III-R Disorders (SCID-II) were applied to all participants and Diagnostic Interview for ADHD (DIVA) for ADHD group based on DSM-5 criteria. The participants filled the Young Schema Questionnaire (YSQ-S3), Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS), Wender Utah RatingScale-25 (WURS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). All maladaptive schemas were found to be statistically significantly higher in the ADHD group. As compatible with ADHD core symptoms, "Failure," "Emotional Inhibition," "Insufficient Self-Control" and "Social Isolation" were the most seen maladaptive schemas in the ADHD group. "Approval Seeking," "Entitlement/Grandiosity" and "Punitiveness" were found the weakest schemas in the ADHD group. This study besides supporting the theory of early maladaptive schemas suggests that identifying and modifying maladaptive schemas interventions based on specific schemas can be an important and useful method for psychotherapy in treatment of ADHD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cpp.2569

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Regular feedback loops between coach and client reinforce accountability, enhance executive functioning, and sustain behavioral change.

    “Regular feedback loops between coach and client reinforce accountability, enhance executive functioning, and sustain behavioral change [170].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kiraz, S., & Sertçelik, S.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychiatry Hitit University Erol Olçok Training and Research Hospital Çorum Turkey
  • Haydarpaşa Numune Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi (TR)
Venue
Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-02-24
Volume
28
Issue
5
Pages
1055-1064
ISSN
  • 1063-3995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0879
OpenAlex
W3131376450
Cited by
20
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Hitit University Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
adult ADHD, early maladaptive schemas, schema therapy, emotional inhibition, social isolation, approval seeking, entitlement, punitiveness, depression, anxiety, psychotherapy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Emotions, Humans, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotherapy, Surveys and Questionnaires, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review