Modeling the Relationships Between Metacognitive Beliefs, Attention Control and Symptoms in Children With and Without Anxiety Disorders: A Test of the S-REF Model
Open accessAbstract
In the metacognitive model, attentional control and metacognitive beliefs are key transdiagnostic mechanisms contributing to psychological disorder. The aim of the current study was to investigate the relative contribution of these mechanisms to symptoms of anxiety and depression in children with anxiety disorders and in non-clinical controls. In a cross-sectional design, 351 children (169 children diagnosed with a primary anxiety disorder and 182 community children) between 7 and 14 years of age completed self-report measures of symptoms, attention control and metacognitive beliefs. Clinically anxious children reported significantly higher levels of anxiety, lower levels of attention control and higher levels of maladaptive metacognitive beliefs than controls. Across groups, lower attention control and higher levels of maladaptive metacognitive beliefs were associated with stronger symptoms, and metacognitions were negatively associated with attention control. Domains of attention control and metacognitions explained unique variance in symptoms when these were entered in the same model within groups, and an interaction effect between metacognitions and attention control was found in the community group that explained additional variance in symptoms. In conclusion, the findings are consistent with predictions of the metacognitive model; metacognitive beliefs and individual differences in self-report attention control both contributed to psychological dysfunction in children and metacognitive beliefs appeared to be the strongest factor.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Preliminary evaluations of metacognitive beliefs in children and adolescent non-clinical samples highlight that, similar to adults, metacognitive beliefs positively relate to anxiety and depression.
“However, preliminary evaluations of metacognitive beliefs in children and adolescent non-clinical samples highlight that similar to adults, metacognitive beliefs positively relate to anxiety and depression [79, 80].”
From Metacognitive beliefs and their relationship with anxiety and depression in physical illnesses: A systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [80]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 51 · Cited by 29
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Rothbart M. K. Bates J. E. (1998). “Temperament,” in Handbook of Child Psychology: Social, Emotional and Personality Development, 5th Edn Vol. 3 eds Damon W. Eisenberg N. (New York, NY: Wiley), 105– 176.
- Authors
- Reinholdt-Dunne, M. L., Blicher, A., Nordahl, H., Normann, N., Esbjørn, B. H., & Wells, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2019-06-07
- Volume
- 10
- Pages
- 1205-1205
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6568246
- OpenAlex
- W2956640947
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 5.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
- Keywords
- metacognitive beliefs, attentional control, metacognitive model, childhood anxiety disorders, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, transdiagnostic mechanisms, children
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
