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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".