The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of intolerance of uncertainty: Development and validation of a new self-report measure
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“This, however, appears to be a common occurrence in scientific studies of IU. 10,11,38”
From Psychometric properties of the brazilian intolerance of uncertainty scale – short version (Ius-12) (2020) · cites this paper as [38]
In the citing paper
“Maack, Deacon, and Abramowitz (2005) argued that some items on the IUS do not exhibit face validity and instead measure presumed consequences associated with IU rather than IU directly (cited by Gosselin et al., 2008).”
From Extension of the Transdiagnostic Model to Focus on Intolerance of Uncertainty: A Review of the Literature and Implications for Treatment (2014) · cites this paper as Gosselin et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“The complexity appears to arise from redundancy and the lack of a close relationship between items on the original IUS and items on the back-translated English version of the scale (Buhr & Dugas, 2002; Carleton, Sharpe, & Asmundson, 2007; Gosselin et al., 2008; Norton, 2005).”
From Extension of the Transdiagnostic Model to Focus on Intolerance of Uncertainty: A Review of the Literature and Implications for Treatment (2014) · cites this paper as Gosselin et al., 2008
Citations
Cites
Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research
Brown, T. A. (2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2769 · Cited by 15,621
(1991) · Cited by 15,554
Testing Structural Equation Models.
Clogg, C. C., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1995) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2580595 · Cited by 8,246
Development and validation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire
Meyer, T. J., Miller, M. L., Metzger, R. L., & Borkovec, T. D. (1990) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0005-7967(90)90135-6 · Cited by 5,099
Fearing the unknown: A short version of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale
Carleton, R. N., Norton, M. A. P. J., & Asmundson, G. J. G. (2007) · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.03.014 · Cited by 2,288
Freeston, M. H., Rhéaume, J., Letarte, H., Dugas, M. J., & Ladouceur, R. (1994) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/0191-8869(94)90048-5 · Cited by 1,731
Self-citationThe intolerance of uncertainty scale: psychometric properties of the English version
Buhr, K., & Dugas, M. J. (2002) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(01)00092-4 · Cited by 1,391
Generalized anxiety disorder: A preliminary test of a conceptual model
Dugas, M. J., Gagnon, F., Ladouceur, R., & Freeston, M. H. (1998) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(97)00070-3 · Cited by 1,072 · cited 1×
“More precisely, GAD patients present a higher level of intolerance of uncertainty compared to nonclinical participants or a group of patients with other anxiety disorders (Dugas et al., 1998).”
BackgroundSelf-citationObsessions and compulsions: The Padua inventory
Sanavio, E. (1988) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0005-7967(88)90116-7 · Cited by 926
Intolerance of uncertainty and worry: investigating specificity in a nonclinical sample
Dugas, M. J., Gosselin, P., & Ladouceur, R. (2001) · Cognitive Therapy and Research · doi:10.1023/a:1005553414688 · Cited by 538 · cited 1×
“The Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS), developed in French by Freeston et al. (1994) and translated to English by Buhr and Dugas (2002), is the most currently used instrument.”
MethodSelf-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Dugas, 2001, The worry and anxiety questionnaire: validation among nonclinical and clinical participants, Journal de Thérapie Comportementale et Cognitive, 11, 31
- Freeston, 1991, La mesure des symptômes obsessifs—compulsifs, Journal de Thérapie Comportementale et Cognitive, 4, 22
- Gosselin, 2001, Évaluation des Inquiétudes: validation d’une traduction française du PSWQ, L’Encéphale, 27, 475
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Into the unknown: A review and synthesis of contemporary models involving uncertainty
Carleton, R. N. (2016) · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.02.007 · Cited by 1,104
Increasingly certain about uncertainty: Intolerance of uncertainty across anxiety and depression
Carleton, R. N., Mulvogue, M. K., Thibodeau, M. A., McCabe, R. E., Antony, M. M., & Asmundson, G. J. G. (2012) · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2012.01.011 · Cited by 775
Gentes, E. L., & Ruscio, A. M. (2011) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.05.001 · Cited by 601
Carleton, R. N. (2012) · Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics · doi:10.1586/ern.12.82 · Cited by 665
Tolerance of uncertainty: Conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare
Hillen, M. A., Gutheil, C. M., Strout, T. D., Smets, E. M. A., & Han, P. K. J. (2017) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.024 · Cited by 615
Metadata
- 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
