Roger Covin

The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Are you Roger Covin?

Claim your profile

Publications (4)9.52 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous meta-analyses assessing the effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) used general measures of anxiety to assess symptom severity and improvement (e.g., Hamilton Anxiety Ratings Scale or a composite measure of anxiety). While informative, these studies do not provide sufficient evidence as to whether CBT significantly reduces the cardinal symptom of GAD: pathological worry. The current meta-analysis employed stringent inclusion criteria to evaluate relevant outcome studies, including the use of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire as the main outcome variable. Results showed a large overall effect size (ES) that was moderated by age and modality of treatment. Specifically, the largest gains were found for younger adults and for individual treatment. Analyses also revealed overall maintenance of gains at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Clinical implications of different treatment packages are discussed, as well as potential explanations for the differential effectiveness of CBT.
    Journal of Anxiety Disorders 02/2008; 22(1):108-16. · 2.96 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Given the role that worry beliefs play in the perseveration of catastrophic worrying, there is a greater clinical need for psychologists to have access to valid measures of worry beliefs. The current study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Consequences of Worry Scale (COWS) and assessed whether worry beliefs predict variables affecting clinical outcome. The sample included 252 undergraduates and 182 community residents self-identified as anxious. The psychometric properties of the scale were generally good although the factor structure did not replicate previous findings. Negative worry beliefs were related in expected directions to a number of measures of psychopathology and significantly predicted increased motivation for change across both samples. Future research should assess this instrument’s psychometrics with a clinical sample. Direct comparisons between the COWS and related indices (e.g., the Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire) is also warranted.
    Cognitive Therapy and Research 01/2008; 32(1):133-142. · 1.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The assessment of cognition and cognitive change is important for case conceptualization, monitoring the efficacy of specific interventions, and evaluating treatment outcome in cognitive-behavioral therapy. Unfortunately, a paucity of normative data exists on cognitive measures used for psychotherapy outcome research in depression, and little information is available to guide a practitioner's understanding of the magnitude and clinical significance of a patient's cognitive change. This article presents normative data on 6 self-report instruments that assess negative and positive automatic thoughts, hopelessness, cognitive biases and errors, and dysfunctional attitudes. Normative data were derived from studies published from the date of inception of a given cognitive index to the year 2000. Recommendations for the use of these normative data are provided.
    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 03/2003; 71(1):71-80. · 4.85 Impact Factor
  • David J.A. Dozois, Roger Covin
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This chapter describes the Beck Depression Inventory-Second edition (BDI-II), Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS), and Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSS). Given that the BDI-II is the most widely used of these measures, coupled with the fact that comprehensive reviews of this revised instrument have yet to appear in the literature, the primary focus of this chapter concerns the examination of the BDI-II. However, the remaining scales that we review are used widely as well, especially in the assessment of depression. Although we do not review the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), which is another of the most commonly used Beck scales, readers are directed to some recent review papers (see Steer & Beck,1997; Wilson, de Beurs, Palmer, & Chambless, 1999). We begin with a review of the principal features, test development, psychometric characteristics, research status, and applicability of each of these instruments. We also discuss the limitations of these measures, mention age and cross-cultural factors, highlight accommodations made for persons with disabilities, address legal and ethical issues, and summarize each instrument's current research status. Following this examination, we underscore how these measures may be used in clinical practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)