Cited by 39Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAttachment and Relationship DynamicsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Psychological Flexibility under Fire: Testing the Incremental Validity of Experiential Avoidance

Vaughan-Johnston, Thomas I., Quickert, Rachael E., MacDonald, Tara K.·2017·Personality and Individual Differences

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.011

Cites

45 of 45 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

2 of the 47 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vaughan-Johnston, T. I., Quickert, R. E., & MacDonald, T. K.
Affiliations
Queen's University (CA)
Venue
Personality and Individual Differences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
105
Pages
335-349
ISSN
0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2535156507
Cited by
39
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
FWCI
4.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
experiential avoidance, psychological flexibility, incremental validity, discriminant validity, relationship conflict, attachment anxiety, neuroticism, mood, emotional responses, cognitive responses, behavioral responses

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