Imperfection, Indecision, and Hoarding
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?
The two subscales of the F-MPS-B ('Evaluative Concerns' and 'Striving') showed strong internal consistency in community and clinical samples.
“The two subscales (“Evaluative Concerns” and “Striving”) showed strong internal consistency in community and clinical samples [157].”
From Efficacy of a transdiagnostic Internet prevention approach in adolescents (EMPATIA study): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [157]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 39 · Cited by 20
- Authors
- Burgess, A., Frost, R. O., Marani, C., & Gabrielson, I.
- Affiliations
- Worcester State University (US)
- Smith College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Burgess, Alexandra
- Venue
- Current Psychology
- Published
- 2017-10-06
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 445-453
- ISSN
- 1046-1310 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-4733
- OpenAlex
- W2761115640
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 1.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Current Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- hoarding disorder, perfectionism, indecision, decisional procrastination, clutter, discarding, evaluative concerns, striving, cognitive-behavioral model, decision-making, women
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
