CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 459Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward a definition of intolerance of uncertainty: A review of factor analytical studies of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale

Open access
Birrell, Jane, Meares, Kevin, Wilkinson, Andrew, Freeston, Mark·2011·Clinical Psychology Review
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.009
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Since its emergence in the early 1990s, a narrow but concentrated body of research has developed examining the role of intolerance of uncertainty (IU) in worry, and yet we still know little about its phenomenology. In an attempt to clarify our understanding of this construct, this paper traces the way in which our understanding and definition of IU have evolved throughout the literature. This paper also aims to further our understanding of IU by exploring the latent variables measures by the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS; Freeston, Rheaume, Letarte, Dugas & Ladouceur, 1994). A review of the literature surrounding IU confirmed that the current definitions are categorical and lack specificity. A critical review of existing factor analytic studies was carried out in order to determine the underlying factors measured by the IUS. Systematic searches yielded 9 papers for review. Two factors with 12 consistent items emerged throughout the exploratory studies, and the stability of models containing these two factors was demonstrated in subsequent confirmatory studies. It is proposed that these factors represent (i) desire for predictability and an active engagement in seeking certainty, and (ii) paralysis of cognition and action in the face of uncertainty. It is suggested that these factors may represent approach and avoidance responses to uncertainty. Further research is required to confirm the construct validity of these factors and to determine the stability of this structure within clinical samples.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.009

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 71 references

2 of the 71 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Gould, 2004, Cognitive-behavioral treatments: A meta-analytic review, 248
  2. Seagrave, V. (2009). Overcoming jumping to conclusions. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Newcastle University.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 458

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Birrell, J., Meares, K., Wilkinson, A., & Freeston, M.
Affiliations
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • Cumbria Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Birrell, Jane
ORCID
Freeston, Mark
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-11
Volume
31
Issue
7
Pages
1198-1208
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cpr.2011.07.009
OpenAlex
W2009179987
Cited by
459
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 11
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Keywords
intolerance of uncertainty, Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale, factor structure, construct validity, worry, approach-avoidance behavior, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive symptoms
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders, Humans, Models, Psychological, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results, Uncertainty

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