Cited by 53Schizophrenia research and treatmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMindfulness and Compassion Interventions

Deictic relational responding, empathy, and experiential avoidance as predictors of social anhedonia: Further contributions from relational frame theory

Vilardaga, Roger, Estévez, Ana, Levin, Michael E., Hayes, Steven C.·2012·The Psychological Record

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf03395811

Cites

82 of 82 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 84 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vilardaga, R., Estévez, A., Levin, M. E., & Hayes, S. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Nevada, Reno (US)
  • Universidad de Deusto (ES)
Corresponding author
Vilardaga, Roger
Venue
The Psychological Record
Published
2012-07
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
409-432
ISSN
  • 0033-2933 (ISSN-L)
  • 2163-3452
OpenAlex
W2616813975
Cited by
53
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Psychological Record (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Keywords
social anhedonia, empathy, empathic concern, experiential avoidance, relational frame theory, acceptance and commitment therapy, psychosis, university students

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