Does Context Influence How People Higher and Lower in the Propensity to Worry React to Uncertainty?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that individuals high in chronic worry experience greater anxiety when faced with uncertainty than those lower in chronic worry (e.g., Dugas et al., 2004); however, there is a dearth of research on other potentially important cognitive and emotional reactions to uncertainty. The present dissertation examined whether individuals higher in worry have greater beliefs that uncertainty is unfair, they do not deserve to be uncertain, they are not able to cope with uncertainty, and anger, as well as whether individuals lower in worry have more positive appraisals (being confident they can handle uncertainty, accepting uncertainty, happiness, excitement, calm, feeling psychologically safe, and predicting uncertain scenarios will end well). This dissertation also examined whether context moderates reactions to uncertainty, as most clinical research has focused on decontextualized reactions. Study 1 examined the impact of being alone or with others in uncertainty, Study 2 examined whether uncertainty was expected or unexpected, and Study 3 examined whether the uncertainty was likely to end positively or negatively. It was predicted that individuals higher in worry would show less difference in reactions based on contextual factors, representing a general intolerance of uncertainty irrespective of context. Findings across the three studies suggested that chronic worry is associated with greater anxiety, greater perception of uncertainty, greater doubt about one's capacity to cope, low confidence handling uncertainty, and greater anger, rather than finding uncertainty unfair, feeling one doesn’t deserve to be uncertain, or not accepting uncertainty. Individuals higher in worry did not statistically experience less positive emotion in reaction to uncertain situations that are likely to end well, nor did they appraise uncertain positive scenarios as more likely to end negatively or as more unsafe than those lower in worry. On average, individuals higher in worry responded to context similarly to those lower in worry, finding being alone in uncertainty, not expecting uncertainty, and threatening outcome uncertainty to be more aversive. In summary, chronic worry appears to be associated with stronger negative cognitive and emotional reactions, especially anxiety and doubts about capacity to cope with uncertainty, to uncertain scenarios with a greater potential for threat.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".