Cited by 29Pediatric Pain Management TechniquesCancer survivorship and careAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Self-Distancing Buffers High Trait Anxious Pediatric Cancer Caregivers Against Short- and Longer-Term Distress

Open access
Penner, Louis A., Guevarra, Darwin A., Harper, Felicity W. K., Taub, Jeffrey, Phipps, Sean, Albrecht, Terrance L., Kross, Ethan·2016·Clinical Psychological Science

Abstract

Pediatric cancer caregivers are typically present at their child’s frequent, invasive treatments, and such treatments elicit substantial distress. Yet variability exists in how even the most anxious caregivers cope. Here we examined one potential source of this variability: caregivers’ tendencies to self-distance when reflecting on their feelings surrounding their child’s treatments. We measured caregivers’ self-distancing and trait anxiety at baseline, anticipatory anxiety during their child’s treatment procedures, and psychological distress and avoidance 3 months later. Self-distancing buffered high (but not low) trait anxious caregivers against short- and long-term distress without promoting avoidance. These findings held when controlling for other buffers, highlighting the unique benefits of self-distancing. These results identify a coping process that buffers vulnerable caregivers against a chronic life stressor while also demonstrating the ecological validity of laboratory research on self-distancing. Future research is needed to explicate causality and the cognitive and physiological processes that mediate these results.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2167702615602864

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Cross-sectional studies indicate that the positive association between psychological stressors and distress is lessened as decentering-related abilities increase.

    “Second, cross-sectional studies indicate that the positive association between psychological stressors and distress is lessened as decentering-related abilities increase.”

    From Decentering as a core component in the psychological treatment and prevention of youth anxiety and depression: a narrative review and insight report (2021) · cites this paper as [66]

    The Results section reports that spontaneous self-distancing moderated the association between trait anxiety and distress among pediatric cancer caregivers, supporting the buffering idea. The claim generalizes this finding to psychological stressors and decentering-related abilities broadly, while the paper studies trait anxiety and self-distancing specifically. Its longer-term distress analysis also uses follow-up data, rather than a cross-sectional design. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Derogatis LR 2001 BSI 18, Brief Symptom Inventory 18: Administration, scoring and procedures manual Minneapolis, MN NCS Pearson Inc
  2. Spielberger CD 1989 State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: Bibliography 2 Palo Alto, CA Consulting Psychologists Press
  3. Watson D Clark LA Tellegen A 1988 Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 6 1063 1070 3397865
  4. Weiss DS Marmar CR 1997 The Impact of Event Scale—Revised Wilson JP Keane TM Assessing psychological trauma and PTSD: A handbook for practitioners 399 411 New York, NY Guilford Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Penner, L. A., Guevarra, D. A., Harper, F. W. K., Taub, J., Phipps, S., Albrecht, T. L., & Kross, E.
Affiliations
  • Wayne State University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Children's Hospital of Michigan (US)
  • St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Penner, Louis A.
Venue
Clinical Psychological Science
Published
2016-06-23
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
629-640
ISSN
  • 2167-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 2167-7034
OpenAlex
W2175952388
Cited by
29
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
6.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA138981)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
self-distancing, trait anxiety, anticipatory anxiety, psychological distress, avoidance, coping, caregiver burden

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