Ruminative and Catastrophizing Cognitive Styles Mediate the Association Between Daily Hassles and High Anxiety in Hong Kong Adolescents
Abstract
This study assessed rumination, catastrophizing and daily hassles as predictors of anxiety when controlling for depressive symptoms in a community sample of adolescents reporting high anxiety. Adolescents aged 12-18 (N = 2,802, mean age of 14.9) completed the Screen For Child Anxiety-Related Emotional Disorders. With a total score of 30 as the cutoff, a group of high anxiety adolescents was identified (a prevalence rate of 28.02%). Path analyses results showed that amongst the high anxiety boys, catastrophizing but not rumination was a positive predictor of anxiety and it mediated the effects of daily hassles on anxiety. In the high anxiety girls, both rumination and catastrophizing predicted anxiety but only catastrophizing was the mediator between daily hassles and anxiety. It is suggested that such gender differences in cognitive responses styles should be considered in cognitive-behavioral therapeutic approaches designed to help adolescents showing high anxiety.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Rumination, neuroticism, behavioral inhibition, worry, anxiety sensitivity, trauma, and low self-esteem correlated positively with anxiety, with all variables being typical of the female stereotype.
“Such studies showed that rumination, neuroticism, behavioral inhibition, worry, anxiety sensitivity, trauma, and low self-esteem correlated positively with anxiety, with all variables being typical of the female stereotype.33,44,51,55,65,73”
From Factors associated with gender and sex differences in anxiety prevalence and comorbidity: A systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as [33]
Rumination is a salient risk factor for women observed from the review.
“some of the most salient risk factors for women observed from our review were rumination33,44,49,65,73 and anxiety sensitivity.51,55,57,65”
From Factors associated with gender and sex differences in anxiety prevalence and comorbidity: A systematic review (2022) · cites this paper as [33]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 60 · Cited by 35
- Authors
- Chan, S. M., Chan, S. K., & Kwok, W. W.
- Affiliations
- Education University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Corresponding author
- Chan, Siu Mui
- Venue
- Child Psychiatry & Human Development
- Published
- 2014-02-26
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 57-66
- ISSN
- 0009-398X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-3327
- OpenAlex
- W2073264165
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 3.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Child Psychiatry & Human Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
- Keywords
- rumination, catastrophizing, daily hassles, adolescent anxiety, cognitive style, mediation, gender differences, depressive symptoms, cognitive behavioral therapy, Hong Kong adolescents
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Anxiety Disorders, Child, Female, Hong Kong, Humans, Male, Sex Factors, Thinking, Catastrophization
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
