Cited by 170Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingPersonality Traits and Psychology

Further clarifying prospective and inhibitory intolerance of uncertainty: Factorial and construct validity of test scores from the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale.

Hong, Ryan Y., Lee, Stephanie S. M.·2015·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

The Intolerance to Uncertainty Scale (IUS) was developed to measure a dispositional tendency to react negatively to uncertain events, regardless of the occurrence probability of those events. Recent evidence suggests a 2-factor structure underlying the IUS; 1 factor measuring a prospective aspect (i.e., desire for predictability) and the other assessing an inhibitory aspect (i.e., uncertainty paralysis). The factorial and construct validity of the IUS test scores among undergraduate students in Singapore were examined in the present research using exploratory (n = 565) and confirmatory (n = 898) factor analyses. Results indicated that a 2-factor model was preferred over a unitary-factor model. The construct validity of the IUS (and subscale) scores was examined using a comprehensive nomological network of psychopathology and personality/affectivity variables. Differential relations were observed for the prospective and inhibitory components, providing support that the 2 subscales assessed unique aspects of the intolerance of uncertainty construct. An 18-item modified version of IUS was also proposed and its test scores had stronger validity evidence than scores from the widely used 12-item version.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pas0000074

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Hong, R. Y., & Lee, S. S. M.
Affiliations
National University of Singapore (SG)
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2015-06
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
605-620
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W2122741063
Cited by
170
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 2
FWCI
17.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
intolerance of uncertainty, Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale, two-factor structure, factorial validity, construct validity, nomological network, psychopathology, personality, affectivity, undergraduate students
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Character, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Personality Assessment, Prospective Studies, Psychometrics, Risk Factors, Singapore, Students, Uncertainty, 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