Cited by 8Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMindfulness and Compassion Interventions

Facets of experiential avoidance differentially predict engagement in a contamination-based behavioral approach task

Conley, Sara L., Lee, Sarah R., Martyn, Hannah F., Wu, Kevin D.·2019·Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jocrd.2019.100453

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Conley, S. L., Lee, S. R., Martyn, H. F., & Wu, K. D.
Affiliations
Northern Illinois University (US)
Corresponding author
Wu, Kevin D.
Venue
Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-07
Volume
22
Pages
100453
ISSN
2211-3649 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2960553503
Cited by
7
References
50
Citations by year
2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Keywords
experiential avoidance, contamination concerns, task engagement, obsessive-compulsive disorder, exposure and response prevention, procrastination, behavioral avoidance, anxiety, disgust, treatment response

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