CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Cognitive fusion questionnaire: exploring measurement invariance across three groups of Brazilian women and the role of cognitive fusion as a mediator in the relationship between rumination and depression

Open access
Lucena-Santos, Paola, Carvalho, Sérgio, Pinto-Gouveia, José, Gillanders, David, Silva Oliveira, Margareth·2017·Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science
DOI 10.1016/j.jcbs.2017.02.004
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

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.jcbs.2017.02.004

Cites

68 of 68 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?

  • EQ scores are positively associated with other decentering-related constructs such as experiential avoidance and cognitive reappraisal.

    “Scores on the EQ are positively associated with other decentering-related constructs like experiential avoidance (a tendency to attempt to evade difficult thoughts and feelings)30–34 and cognitive reappraisal (an ability to reconceptualise situations to modify emotional impact).27 35”

    From Protocol for a randomised controlled trial investigating an intervention to boost decentering in response to distressing mental experiences during adolescence: the decentering in adolescence study (DECADES) (2022) · cites this paper as [33]

    Table 2 (indexed under Figure 1; page unavailable) reports a negative correlation between EQ decentering scores and AAQ-II scores (r = −0.55), contrary to the claimed positive association with experiential avoidance. The paper does not report an EQ association with cognitive reappraisal. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • EQ scores are moderately strongly associated with the Drexel Defusion Scale (DDS), Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) and Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ).

    “EQ scores are moderately strongly associated with the Drexel Defusion Scale (DDS) (r = 0.39–0.52), Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) (r = −0.40 to −0.61) and Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ) (r = −0.67) (19.10–39.57 years)21,23–27.”

    From Decentering as a core component in the psychological treatment and prevention of youth anxiety and depression: a narrative review and insight report (2021) · cites this paper as [25]

    Table 2 reports moderately strong associations of EQ with CFQ (r = −0.49) and AAQ-II (r = −0.55). The paper discusses the DDS but does not report an EQ–DDS correlation, and its EQ–AAQ-II value is not the cited r = −0.67. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • During adulthood, lower self-rated decentering is associated with increased anxiety and depression.

    “This negative association is also reported during adulthood using the EQ (r anxiety = −0.33 to −0.39; r depression = −0.39 to −0.4)23,26 and CFQ (r anxiety = 0.53–0.64) (r depression = −0.45 to −0.61)25,36,51 (higher CFQ = poorer decentering).”

    From Decentering as a core component in the psychological treatment and prevention of youth anxiety and depression: a narrative review and insight report (2021) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Concurrent validity section reports that CFQ scores are positively associated with anxiety and depression symptoms and negatively associated with EQ decentering. Table 2 gives CFQ correlations of +0.53 with anxiety and +0.60 with depression, not a negative correlation with depression; it also measures decentering in a different sample from the symptom correlations. The Discussion describes fusion and decentering as related but distinct constructs, so this source does not directly establish the claimed decentering–symptom association. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Significant positive association between rumination and depression, as well as negative association between cognitive fusion and decentring and depression have been observed.

    “This finding also appears in line with previous research, where significant positive association between rumination and depression,62–65 as well as negative association between cognitive fusion and decentring (a process like cognitive defusion) and depression have been observed.58,62,66,67”

    From Preliminary investigation of the associations between psychological flexibility, symptoms and daily functioning in people with chronic abdominal pain (2021) · cites this paper as [66]

    The Results report a significant positive total effect of rumination on depressive symptoms. The Discussion reports a negative association between cognitive fusion and decentering, but a positive—not negative—association between cognitive fusion and depression. The cited paper therefore supports only part of the stated pattern. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Moderate correlation between cognitive fusion and anxiety was observed in other studies.

    “Similarly, moderate correlation between cognitive fusion and anxiety was observed in other studies.47,66,67”

    From Preliminary investigation of the associations between psychological flexibility, symptoms and daily functioning in people with chronic abdominal pain (2021) · cites this paper as [66]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Barbosa, L. M. (2013). Terapia de Aceitação e Compromisso e Validação do Acceptance and Action Questionnaire II: Contribuições para Avaliação de Processo em Psicoterapia (Master's Thesis). Retrieved from http://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/15425.
  2. Cassepp-Borges, V., Balbinotti, M. A. A., & Teodoro, M. L. M. (2010). Tradução e validação de conteúdo: Uma proposta para a adaptação de instrumentos. In L. Pasquali (Ed.). Instrumentação psicológica: Fundamentos e práticas (pp. 506-520). Porto Alegre: Artmed.
  3. Dell'Orco, F., Prevedini, A., Oppo, A., Presti, G. B., & Moderato, P. (2012, July). Validation study of the Italian version of the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ). Poster presentation at ACBS Annual World Conference X. Washington, DC.
  4. Dionne, F., Balbinotti, M., Gillanders, D., Gagnon, J., & Monestès, J. L. (2014). Validation of the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire in a French-speaking population. Poster presentation at ACBS Annual World Conference XII. Minneapolis, MN.
  5. Luoma, J. B., Hayes, S. C., & Walser, R. D. (2007). Learning ACT: An Acceptance & Commitment Therapy Skills-Training Manual for Therapists. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger & Reno, NV: Context Press.
  6. Luoma, J., & Hayes, S. C. (2003). Cognitive defusion. In W. T. O'Donohue, J. E. Fisher, & S. C. Hayes (Eds.), Empirically supported techniques of cognitive behavior therapy: A step by step guide for clinicians. New York: Wiley.
  7. Orsillo, S. M., Roemer, L., & Holowka, D. (2005). Acceptance-based behavioral therapies for anxiety: Using acceptance and mindfulness to enhance traditional cognitive-behavioral approaches. In S. M. Orsillo & L. Roemer (Eds.), Acceptance-and mindfulness-based approaches to anxiety: Conceptualization and treatment. New York: Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lucena-Santos, P., Carvalho, S., Pinto-Gouveia, J., Gillanders, D., & Silva Oliveira, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Coimbra (PT)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
53-62
ISSN
2212-1447 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jcbs.2017.02.004
OpenAlex
W2588096532
Cited by
28
References
68
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • 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
Keywords
cognitive fusion, Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire, measurement invariance, psychometric properties, rumination, depression, mediation, women, Brazilian adaptation, psychological inflexibility, mindfulness, decentering, anxiety, stress, obesity, university students

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