MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965292604 · doi:10.1177/0829573511422039

Perfectionism, Rumination, Worry, and Depressive Symptoms in Early Adolescents

2011· article· en· W1965292604 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon L. Flett, Lisa-Marie Coulter, Paul L. Hewitt, Taryn Nepon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorryRuminationPerfectionism (psychology)PsychologyClinical psychologyMediationCognitionDepression (economics)AnxietyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined trait perfectionism, automatic perfectionistic thoughts, rumination, worry, and depressive symptoms in early adolescents. A group of 81 elementary school students in Grades 7 and 8 completed 5 questionnaires: the Child-Adolescent Perfectionism Scale, the Perfectionism Cognitions Inventory, the Children’s Response Styles Questionnaire, the Penn State Worry Questionnaire for Children, and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. The correlational results revealed associations between both trait perfectionism and perfectionistic automatic thoughts and the indices of depression and worry. Rumination was associated with perfectionistic automatic thoughts, self-oriented perfectionism, depression, and worry. Tests of mediation indicated that rumination mediated the association between perfectionism and depressive symptoms, thus highlighting the role of maladaptive forms of cognitive reactivity in perfectionism. The findings suggested that perfectionistic children and youth are at-risk due to cognitive vulnerabilities and they should benefit from programs focused jointly on reducing perfectionism, associated cognitive tendencies, and susceptibility to depression and worry.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations120
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesFrench-language works237,207