Evaluating a Web-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Maladaptive Perfectionism in University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed a Web-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for maladaptive perfectionism, investigating perfectionism, anxiety, depression, negative automatic thoughts, and perceived stress. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were undergraduate students defined as maladaptive perfectionists through a screening questionnaire at an urban university. The data were collected from July 2009 to August 2010. METHODS: Forty-seven maladaptive perfectionists were randomly assigned to a 12-week CBT or a wait-list control group and assessed via questionnaires at pre- and postintervention. Statistical procedures included t tests, Pearson correlations, and analysis of covariance. RESULTS: At the postintervention measure, the CBT group demonstrated significant decreases in anxiety sensitivity and negative automatic thoughts compared to the control group. Within the CBT group, changes in perfectionism scores were significantly correlated with positive changes in depression, anxiety, stress, and automatic thoughts. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment group improved on psychological outcomes, demonstrating the effectiveness of a Web-based CBT for perfectionism in a university setting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".