Cited by 400Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMind wandering and attentionObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders

A cognitive model of pathological worry

Open access
Hirsch, Colette R., Mathews, Andrew·2012·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

We present an evidence-based model of pathological worry in which worry arises from an interaction between involuntary (bottom-up) processes, such as habitual biases in attention and interpretation favouring threat content, and voluntary (top-down) processes, such as attentional control. At a pre-conscious level, these processes influence the competition between mental representations when some correspond to the intended focus of attention and others to threat distracters. Processing biases influence the probability of threat representations initially intruding into awareness as negative thoughts. Worry in predominantly verbal form then develops, influenced by conscious processes such as attempts to resolve the perceived threat and the redirection of attentional control resources to worry content, as well as the continuing influence of habitual processing biases. After describing this model, we present evidence for each component process and for their causal role in pathological worry, together with implications for new directions in the treatment of pathological worry.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brat.2012.06.007

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 association between increases in negative thought intrusions and subsequent increases in subjective anxiety is consistent with cognitive models of pathological worry in anxiety.

    “Nevertheless we found some evidence (across the sample) that increases in negative thought intrusions were associated with subsequent increases in subjective anxiety, consistent with cognitive models of pathological worry in anxiety (Hirsch & Mathews, 2012).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

2 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Borkovec T.D. Sharpless B. Generalised anxiety disorder: bringing cognitive behavioural therapy into the valued present Hayes S. Follette V. Linehan M. New directions in behaviour therapy 2006 Guilford Press New York 209 242

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hirsch, C. R., & Mathews, A.
Affiliations
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Hirsch, Colette R.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-10
Volume
50
Issue
10
Pages
636-646
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026506811
Cited by
400
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10
FWCI
15.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (WT083204)
  • National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
  • Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London
  • Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  • King's College London
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Keywords
pathological worry, worry, cognitive models, attentional bias, threat processing, attentional control, top-down control, bottom-up processing, threat representation, intrusive thoughts, cognitive bias modification
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Attention, Cognition Disorders, Emotions, Humans, Models, Psychological, Evidence-Based Medicine, Executive Function

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