Cited by 104Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingCOVID-19 and Mental Health

Evaluation of intolerance of uncertainty: development and validation of a new self-report measure

Gosselin, Patrick, Ladouceur, Robert, Evers, Audrey, Laverdière, Audrée, Routhier, Sonia, Tremblay-Picard, Marilyn·2008·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

Intolerance of uncertainty represents an important risk factor for development of anxiety disorders. However, few measures have been developed in order to evaluate this construct. Four studies were conducted in order to validate a new instrument evaluating intolerance of uncertainty: the Intolerance of Uncertainty Inventory (IUI). The first study described the questionnaire's development and evaluated the psychometric properties of its preliminary version. Study 2 examined the reliability and the factorial validity of the final version of the questionnaire, while Study 3 mainly addressed its convergent validity. Finally, Study 4 examined the questionnaire's temporal stability. Factorial analyses confirmed the IUI's validity. Results also supported the IUI's reliability, convergent validity, and temporal stability. The IUI is the first instrument that offers the possibility of measuring intolerance of uncertainty as a tendency to consider uncertainties to be unacceptable, as well as in terms of cognitive and behavioral manifestations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.janxdis.2008.02.005

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gosselin, P., Ladouceur, R., Evers, A., Laverdière, A., Routhier, S., & Tremblay-Picard, M.
Affiliations
  • Université de Sherbrooke (CA)
  • Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Gosselin, Patrick
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-12
Volume
22
Issue
8
Pages
1427-1439
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1997823919
Cited by
104
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
4.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
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
intolerance of uncertainty, self-report measure development, psychometric validation, anxiety disorders, convergent validity, temporal stability, factorial validity, reliability statistics
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety Disorders, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Personality Disorders, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Students, Translating, Universities, 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