Cited by 112Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Dutch Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale: Comparison of the full and short version

Open access
Helsen, Kim, Van den Bussche, Eva, Vlaeyen, Johan W.S., Goubert, Liesbet·2013·Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry

Abstract

Background and objectives The Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS) was developed for assessing reactions to ambiguous situations, uncertainty, and future events. The IUS has been validated in different languages, but equivocal factor structures, in combination with highly interrelated items and factors, resulted in a redundancy of the items of the English version. In the current study, the psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the IUS were examined, and compared with the shortened 12-item version (IUS-12).Methods Confirmatory factor analyses were used to investigate different factor structures of both the full and short version of the IUS.Results Results indicated that the IUS-12 model with two factors (Prospective Anxiety and Inhibitory Anxiety) provides the best fit. The reduced measure has equally good internal consistency, and is highly correlated with the full version.Limitations Future research could investigate whether the current findings generalize to clinical populations.Conclusion To summarize, the usage of the short 12-item version of the IUS should be encouraged in future research concerning intolerance of uncertainty.

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.jbtep.2012.07.004

Cites

78 of 78 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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Dugas, M. J., Schwartz, A., & Francis, K. (2004). Intolerance of Uncertainty,Worry, and Depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 28 (6), 835-842.
  2. van Rijsoort, S., Emmelkamp, P., & Vervaeke, G. (1999). The Penn state worry questionnaire and the worry domains questionnaire: Structure, reliability and validity. Clinical psychology & psychotherapy, 6 (4), 297-307.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Helsen, K., Van den Bussche, E., Vlaeyen, J. W. S., & Goubert, L.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • Maastricht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Helsen, Kim
Venue
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-03
Volume
44
Issue
1
Pages
21-29
ISSN
0005-7916 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2084275570
Cited by
112
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4
FWCI
4.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
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 › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale, intolerance of uncertainty, Dutch version, short-form questionnaire, factor structure, psychometric properties, questionnaire validation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Depression, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results, Uncertainty, White People, Young Adult

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