ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Partial and directional relationships between negative metacognitive beliefs and the big five personality traits.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Personality traits represent consistent patterns of expressions in an individual's cognition, behaviour and emotion and are therefore relevant to psychopathology and present markers for psychological vulnerability. The S-REF model has implications for personality and trait theory because it describes higher-order cognitions involved in self-regulation, persistence and the stability of cognitive-behavioural patterns. Variability in features of the S-REF should be associated with personality dimensions and most strongly associated with those reflecting stable psychological vulnerability. Individual differences in metacognitive knowledge representing beliefs about the personal uncontrollability and dangerousness of thoughts is a central variable in the S-REF. The present study aimed to test the hypothesis that such negative metacognitions are associated with personality factors, with the most robust relationships predicted to be with personality dimensions representing psychological vulnerability (e.g., neuroticism). However, we also predicted wider (but weaker) associations between the MCQ factor and a range of personality dimensions because negative metacognitive beliefs in the S-REF model influence the stability of broader cognition-behaviour patterns. Methods: We tested relationships among 296 individuals who completed the full NEO-PI-R. Using a network approach, the structure of partial correlations between negative metacognitions and Big Five personality traits were visualized and explored with an exploratory directed acyclic graph (DAG) of the conditional-dependence structure among these variables. Results: Negative metacognitions showed the highest expected influence in the network. The conditional-independence pattern was more consistent with negative metacognitive beliefs preceding neuroticism than the reverse, but this ordering should not be interpreted as evidence of a causal relationship due to the cross-sectional design. Conclusion: The results are consistent with predictions based on the S-REF model, that negative metacognitive beliefs are associated with, and structurally central among personality dimensions linked to psychological vulnerability. The directional findings are offered as an exploratory hypothesis for future longitudinal or experimental testing rather than as established causal or mechanistic relationships.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.