MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319997766 · doi:10.5127/jep.045714

Working Memory in Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Effects of Verbal and Image-Based Worry and Relation to Cognitive and Emotional Processes

2016· article· en· W2319997766 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen Tallon, Naomi Koerner, Lixia Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychopathology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorryPsychologyGeneralized anxiety disorderAnxietyCognitionAffect (linguistics)Clinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) is characterized by excessive, uncontrollable worry and is associated with cognitive and emotional difficulties including threat interpretation bias (IB). Worry, especially in a verbal mode, has been shown to cause a temporary restriction in working memory (WM). This study examined the effects of verbal and image-based worry on WM, whether the effect of worry on WM accounts for IB in persons with GAD, and the degree to which WM correlates with cognitive and emotional processes associated with GAD. At baseline, participants (N = 32) with GAD completed questionnaires assessing worry, and related processes, and WM and IB tasks. Participants were then trained to worry in verbal or imagery form, per Leigh and Hirsch (2011), and completed WM and IB tasks a second time. At baseline, in the absence of induced worry, lower WM was related to greater emotion dysregulation, intolerance of uncertainty, negative problem orientation, and lower attentional control. Induced worry, regardless of the form, did not significantly affect WM or IB.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental PsychopathologySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207