CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and AssessmentsPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Norwegian version of the automatic thoughts questionnaire: a reliability and validity study

Chioqueta, Andrea P., Stiles, Tore C.·2004·Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
DOI 10.1080/16506070310016031
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study investigated the reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire. Three samples were used: (a) 344 male military recruits; (b) 142 psychiatric outpatients; and (c) 41 healthy controls. The Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire was found to have high internal consistency and satisfactory temporal stability. It correlated positively with the Beck Depression Inventory and was found to discriminate significantly between clinically depressed and non-depressed psychiatric patients and healthy controls. In general the results are satisfactory, suggesting that the Norwegian version of the Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire has adequate reliability and validity properties. The Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire was shown to be a useful measure of frequency of automatic negative thoughts in both clinical and non-clinical populations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/16506070310016031

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Beck AT, 1967, University of Pennsylvania Press
  2. Beck AT, 1979, Guilford Press
  3. Spitzer RL, 1984, Biometrics Research Department

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Chioqueta, A. P., & Stiles, T. C.
Affiliations
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
ORCID
Stiles, Tore C.
Venue
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2004-06
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
79-82
ISSN
  • 1650-6073 (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-2316
DOI
10.1080/16506070310016031
OpenAlex
W2047353561
Cited by
24
References
12
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire, negative automatic thoughts, cognitive distortions, depression, Norwegian translation, psychometric validation, reliability statistics, validity, military recruits, psychiatric outpatients
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Military Personnel, Norway, Psychological Tests, Reproducibility of Results, Case-Control Studies

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