MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010197965 · doi:10.1080/16506073.2012.666564

The Role of Anger in Generalized Anxiety Disorder

2012· article· en· W2010197965 on OpenAlexaff
Sonya S. Deschênes, Michel J. Dugas, Katie Fracalanza, Naomi Koerner

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Behaviour Therapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngerPsychologyAnxietyGeneralized anxiety disorderClinical psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about the role of anger in the context of anxiety disorders, particularly with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The aim of study was to examine the relationship between specific dimensions of anger and GAD. Participants (N=381) completed a series of questionnaires, including the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-Q-IV; Newman et al., 2002, Behavior Therapy, 33, 215-233), the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI-2; Spielberger 1999, State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2: STAXI-2 professional manual, Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources) and the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ; Buss & Perry 1992, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452-459). The GAD-Q-IV identifies individuals who meet diagnostic criteria for GAD (i.e. GAD analogues) and those who do not (non-GAD). The STAXI-2 includes subscales for trait anger, externalized anger expression, internalized anger expression, externalized anger control and internalized anger control. The AQ includes subscales for physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger and hostility. The GAD-Q-IV significantly correlated with all STAXI-2 and AQ subscales (r's ranging from .10 to .46). Multivariate analyses of variance revealed that GAD analogues significantly differed from non-GAD participants on the combined STAXI-2 subscales (η2=.098); high levels of trait anger and internalized anger expression contributed the most to GAD group membership. GAD analogue participants also significantly differed from non-GAD participants on the combined AQ subscales (η2=.156); high levels of anger (affective component of aggression) and hostility contributed the most to GAD group membership. Within the GAD analogue group, the STAXI-2 and AQ subscales significantly predicted GAD symptom severity (R2=.124 and .198, respectively). Elevated levels of multiple dimensions of anger characterize individuals who meet diagnostic criteria for GAD.

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)0.005
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations86
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCognitive Behaviour TherapySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207