Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:41:52.544Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intolerance of Uncertainty and Meta-Worry: Relative Importance in Discriminating GAD

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2012

Nigar G. Khawaja ,
Janette McMahon  and
Esben Strodl
Nigar G. Khawaja*
Affiliation:
Queensland University of Technology, Australia. n.khawaja@qut.edu.au
Janette McMahon
Affiliation:
Private Practice, Brisbane, Australia.
Esben Strodl
Affiliation:
Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
*
*Address for correspondence: Dr Nigar Gohar Khawaja, Senior Lecturer, School of Psychology & Counselling, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, O Block, B wing, RM 525, Victoria Park Rd., Kelvin Grove QLD 4059, Australia.
Get access

Abstract

This study explored whether intolerance of uncertainty and/or meta-worry discriminate between non-clinical individuals and those diagnosed with generalised anxiety disorder (GAD group). The participants were 107 GAD clients and 91 university students. The students were divided into two groups (high and low GAD symptom groups). A multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) adjusting for age indicated that intolerance of uncertainty distinguished between the low GAD symptom group and the high GAD symptom group, and between the low GAD symptom group and the GAD group. Meta-worry distinguished all three groups. A discriminant function including intolerance of uncertainty and meta-worry classified 94.4% of the GAD group and 97.9% of the low GAD symptom group. Only 6.8% of the high GAD symptom group was classified correctly, 77.3% of the high GAD symptom group was classified as GAD. Findings indicated that intolerance of uncertainty and meta-worry may assist with the diagnosis and treatment of GAD.

Keywords

GADmeta-worryintolerance of uncertainty
Type
Standard Papers
Information
Behaviour Change , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , 01 December 2011 , pp. 181 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)