Roger Hagen, Audun Havnen, Odin Hjemdal, Leif Edward Ottesen Kennair, Truls Ryum, Stian Solem
Abstract
The aim of the current study was to explore protective (resilience) and vulnerability factors (dysfunctional metacognitions and brooding) for self-esteem. A total of 725 participants were included in a cross-sectional study. A path analysis revealed five paths to self-esteem. The three main paths were as follows: (1) symptoms -> metacognitions -> brooding -> self-esteem, (2) symptoms -> resilience -> self-esteem, and (3) a direct path from symptoms. The first path corresponds with the metacognitive model of psychopathology and suggests that triggers in the form of anxiety and depression symptoms lead to the activation of metacognitive beliefs, which in turn activates brooding in response to these triggers. When a person engages in brooding, this makes the person vulnerable to experiencing low self-esteem. The second path suggests a protective role of resilience factors. The overall model explained 55% of the variance in self-esteem. Regression analysis found that unique predictors of self-esteem were female sex, symptoms of anxiety and depression, brooding, and resilience. These findings have possible clinical implications, as treatment may benefit from addressing both protective and vulnerability factors in individuals suffering from low self-esteem.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2022.
All research outputs
#2,689,559
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,109
of 29,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,078
of 396,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#172
of 786 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,507 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 786 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
