Seeking certainty about Intolerance of Uncertainty: Addressing old and new issues through the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-Revised.

Michael B Steinborn,Marta Ghisi,Gioia Bottesi,Stefano Noventa,Mark H Freeston

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0211929

Michael B Steinborn, Marta Ghisi + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211929

Copy DOI

Abstract

Intolerance of Uncertainty is a trans-diagnostic process that spans a range of emotional disorders and it is usually measured through the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-12. The current study aims at investigating some issues in the assessment of Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) through the Italian Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-Revised, a measure adapted from the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-12 to assess IU across the lifespan. In particular we address the factor structure among a large community sample, measurement invariance across gender, age, and over time, together with reliability and validity of the overall scale and its subscales. The questionnaire was administered to community (N = 761; mean age = 35.86 ± 14.01 years) and undergraduate (N = 163; mean age = 21.16 ± 2.64 years) participants, together with other self-report measures assessing constructs theoretically related to IU. The application of a bifactor model shows that the Italian Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-Revised possesses a robust general factor, thus supporting the use of the unit-weighted total score of the questionnaire as a measure of the construct. Furthermore, measurement invariance across gender, age, and over time is supported. Finally, the Italian Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-Revised appears to possess adequate reliability and validity. These findings support the unidimensionality of the measure, a conceptually reasonable result in line with the trans-diagnostic nature of Intolerance of Uncertainty. In addition, this study and comparison with published factor structures of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-12 and of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-Revised identify some issues for the internal structure of the measure. In particular, concern is expressed for the Prospective IU subscale. In light of the promising psychometric properties, the use of the Italian Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-Revised as a univocal measure is encouraged in both research and clinical practice.

Highlights

Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) is the dispositional inability of an individual to tolerate the aversive reactions triggered by a perceived lack of sufficient/salient information and maintained by the related perception of uncertainty [1]
Beyond providing increasing evidence about the adequacy of the Italian Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS)-R as a measure of IU, the current study addressed a number of yet unexplored or only partially explored issues which we will address in turn
With respect to the factor structure of the questionnaire, results from the Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) on the community sample suggested that the correlated two-factor model showed adequate fit indexes and might be a reasonable representation of the IU construct

Summary

Introduction

Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) is the dispositional inability of an individual to tolerate the aversive reactions triggered by a perceived lack of sufficient/salient information and maintained by the related perception of uncertainty [1]. In the attempt to control or avoid uncertainty, they usually endorse negative beliefs about their ability to cope with it, they experience high levels of distress, and they are likely to perform maladaptive behaviors like excessive information seeking, avoidance, or impulsive decision-making [2,3,4,5,6]. IU shares similarities with other psychological constructs (such as intolerance of ambiguity [7], distress tolerance [8], stress vulnerability [9], action vs state orientation [10], indecisiveness [11], need for cognitive closure [12]), but its distinctiveness has been demonstrated [13,14,15] to the extent that fearing the unknown is posited to represent a fundamental fear [1]. In light of the relevance of IU as a clinical concept, the availability of a valid measure capable of reliably measuring it in both clinical and research settings appears crucial

Methods

Results

Conclusion