Cited by 67Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

What lies beyond neuroticism? An examination of the unique contributions of social-cognitive vulnerabilities to internalizing disorders

Naragon-Gainey, Kristin, Watson, David·2018·Assessment

Abstract

Extensive research has identified various social-cognitive vulnerabilities for internalizing disorders. However, few studies have assessed multiple disorders simultaneously, so it is unclear whether these vulnerabilities are transdiagnostic or specific risk factors. Their unique associations with disorders are also uncertain, given that they correlate strongly with neuroticism and one other. Psychiatric outpatients completed self-report and interview measures of six disorders (depression, generalized anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, social anxiety, panic, obsessive-compulsive disorder), and personality (the Big Five, neuroticism facets, and four vulnerabilities: anxiety sensitivity, intolerance of uncertainty, perfectionism, experiential avoidance). All constructs were modeled as latent variables using structural equation modeling. All four vulnerabilities were closely associated with neuroticism, loading on its anxiety facet in factor analyses. Furthermore, after accounting for the contribution of neuroticism facets, intolerance of uncertainty and experiential avoidance were not uniquely associated with any disorders, and perfectionism was only related to obsessive-compulsive disorder. However, anxiety sensitivity accounted for substantial unique variance in several disorders (i.e., depression, social anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, and panic). We discuss theoretical and clinical implications of these results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1073191116659741

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 91 · Cited by 67

Authors
Naragon-Gainey, K., & Watson, D.
Affiliations
  • University at Buffalo, the State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA
  • University of Notre Dame (US)
Venue
Assessment
Published
2016-07-13
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
143-158
ISSN
  • 1073-1911 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3489
OpenAlex
W2471284741
Cited by
67
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
7.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Society for a Science of Clinical Psychology
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH068472)
  • American Psychological Association
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
internalizing disorders, neuroticism, anxiety sensitivity, intolerance of uncertainty, perfectionism, experiential avoidance, transdiagnostic risk factors, depression, generalized anxiety disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, social anxiety, panic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, Big Five personality traits
MeSH terms
Neuroticism, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Anxiety Disorders, Cognition, Depression, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Outpatients, Panic, Personality Tests, Psychometrics, Social Behavior, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Young Adult, Self Report

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