Cited by 177Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingCOVID-19 and Mental Health

Assessing worry in older and younger adults: psychometric properties of an abbreviated penn state worry questionnaire (PSWQ-A)

Crittendon, Julie, Hopko, Derek R.·2006·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

Among older adults, recent work indicated that Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) data fit poorly with previously established models, leading to use of model modification procedures to create an abbreviated worry questionnaire (PSWQ-A; Hopko, D. R., Stanley, M. A., Reas, D. L., Wetherell, J. L., Beck, J. G., Novy, D. M., et al. (2003). Assessing worry in older adults: Confirmatory factor analyses of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire and psychometric properties of an abbreviated model. Psychological Assessment, 15, 173-183). Given limitations of this prior study that included the post hoc statistical development of the scale and undefined relevance toward assessing worry in younger cohorts, psychometric properties of the PSWQ-A were explored among independent samples of older (n = 115) and younger adults (n = 183). Exploratory factor analyses supported a unidimensional model (breadth and control of worry) that accounted for substantial variance in older (57%) and younger adult samples (70%) and was associated with high factor loadings (.66-.89). Internal consistency (alpha = .89-.94) and test-retest reliability (r = .87-.95) was strong in both samples. Moderate to strong convergent validity with measures of worry and anxiety was evident (r = .46-.83), as was support for the construct validity of the PSWQ-A via its relation to the PSWQ (r = .65-.83) and similar relations with other anxiety and worry measures. Although further study is required, the PSWQ-A may be a parsimoni…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.janxdis.2005.11.006

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 87 · Cited by 177

Authors
Crittendon, J., & Hopko, D. R.
Affiliations
University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
Corresponding author
Hopko, Derek R.
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006
Volume
20
Issue
8
Pages
1036-1054
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2024188169
Cited by
177
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › COVID-19 and Mental Health
Keywords
Penn State Worry Questionnaire, worry, older adults, young adults, psychometric properties, factor structure, anxiety, convergent validity, construct validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Reproducibility of Results

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