Can You Stop Being Neurotic? What Can Change and What the Label Gets Wrong
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 30, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Yes—many of the states, habits, symptoms, and response patterns that people casually call “being neurotic” can change. Even measured personality traits are not perfectly fixed. But the phrase “stop being neurotic” compresses several different psychological questions into one label, and each question has a different answer. A period of stress can settle. A learned checking or reassurance habit can be modified. Persistent anxiety or depression can respond to evidence-based care. A measured personality trait such as neuroticism can shift over time and, in some studies, during targeted intervention. None of those facts creates a clinical condition called “being neurotic.”
The most useful move is therefore not to decide whether you are permanently “a neurotic person.” It is to identify what the word is standing in for: an everyday label, a behavior pattern, an emotional state, a personality trait, a symptom, a risk factor, a screening result, or a diagnosable disorder. That distinction tells you what evidence applies, what can realistically change, and what kind of help—if any—makes sense.
If your main question is whether the label fits you at all, start with Am I Neurotic? How to Understand the Label Without Self-Diagnosing. If you want the broader meaning of the expression, see What Is a Neurotic Person? Meaning, Traits, Behavior, and Modern Psychology.
Can you stop being neurotic? The short answer
You can change many things that may be described with the word neurotic, but you cannot answer the question precisely until you know which thing you mean. Contemporary everyday English still uses neurotic for anxious, worried, or unusually reactive behavior; Cambridge Dictionary documents this ordinary-language use. That usage is broad enough to cover very different experiences, which is exactly why it works poorly as a psychological explanation.
Modern diagnostic systems work differently. The American Psychiatric Association’s description of DSM-5-TR explains that diagnoses are defined through recognized categories, diagnostic criteria, duration, exclusions, and clinical judgment. The World Health Organization’s ICD-11 clinical manual likewise provides clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements for specific mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders. “Being neurotic” is not a conclusion that follows from noticing worry, emotional sensitivity, perfectionism, reassurance seeking, jealousy, overthinking, control, or self-criticism.
Personality science adds another layer. Neuroticism is a dimensional trait: people differ in their typical tendency to experience negative affect and respond strongly to threat, frustration, uncertainty, or loss. Research on neuroticism can tell us something about personality-trait stability and change. It cannot automatically be transferred to every person whom a friend, partner, social-media post, or the person themselves happens to call neurotic.
The label can refer to several different psychological levels
A single sentence—“I’m too neurotic”—might be describing anything from a bad week to a long-standing personality tendency. Keeping the levels separate prevents the label from doing diagnostic work it cannot do.
Everyday label: a loose word for seeming worried, tense, overthinking, emotionally reactive, fussy, controlling, insecure, self-critical, or easily unsettled.
Behavior pattern: something repeated, such as checking, asking for reassurance, avoiding uncertainty, repeatedly revisiting a decision, or trying to control small details.
Emotional state: a current period of anxiety, irritability, sadness, shame, tension, fear, or stress reactivity.
Personality trait: a relatively enduring tendency measured with a validated personality instrument, such as neuroticism or its facets.
Symptom: a specific experience that may occur in many contexts or conditions, such as persistent worry, sleep disruption, panic-like sensations, low mood, rumination, or intrusive thoughts.
Risk factor: a characteristic statistically associated with greater likelihood of an outcome, without determining that outcome in an individual.
Screening result: a score that may indicate elevated symptoms or a trait level; it is not the same thing as a diagnosis.
Diagnosis or clinical disorder: a defined clinical condition assessed using its own criteria, history, differential diagnosis, impairment, and professional judgment.
This is also why a list of “neurotic traits” cannot tell you what condition someone has. The same visible behavior can arise from ordinary stress, personality, habit, relationship dynamics, a medical problem, sleep deprivation, substance effects, anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive processes, trauma-related responses, or something else. For a more detailed translation of everyday descriptions into possibilities rather than diagnoses, see Neurotic Traits: Worry, Sensitivity, Emotional Reactivity, and What the Label Misses.
What can actually change?
1. Temporary emotional states can change
If “neurotic” means that you have been unusually tense, worried, irritable, self-conscious, or reactive during a stressful period, the relevant target may be a state rather than a trait. States can fluctuate over hours, days, weeks, and life circumstances. A person can feel much more anxious during conflict, sleep loss, illness, caregiving strain, financial uncertainty, exams, a breakup, or a demanding work period without having undergone a permanent personality transformation.
This matters because a temporary rise in distress can make a stable identity judgment feel convincing: “This is who I am.” The experience may be real while the identity conclusion is too broad. Asking what changed around the time the pattern intensified is often more informative than asking whether you have become “a neurotic person.” The article Why Am I So Neurotic? Stress, Personality, Learned Patterns, and Mental Health develops that question in more depth.
2. Repeated behaviors and habits can change
If the label refers to what you repeatedly do—rechecking messages, asking the same question for reassurance, postponing decisions, avoiding uncertainty, trying to prevent every possible mistake, or replaying conversations—then the change target is behavioral. Behaviors can become habitual because they are repeated in similar contexts and because some of them provide immediate relief. Immediate relief, however, does not tell you whether a strategy is useful over the longer term.
A behavior should be described before it is interpreted. “I check the door six times when I am under pressure” is more useful than “I’m neurotic.” “I ask my partner whether everything is okay after small changes in tone” is more useful than “I’m crazy.” Once the behavior, trigger, short-term consequence, and longer-term cost are visible, it becomes possible to ask what evidence-based framework actually fits. Neurotic Behavior Patterns: Worry, Avoidance, Reassurance, Control, and Self-Criticism maps several of these patterns without treating them as a diagnosis.
3. Symptoms can improve even when a personality tendency remains
A person may have a relatively enduring tendency toward worry or negative emotionality while also having a treatable episode of anxiety or depression. Trait and symptom are not interchangeable. The review by Ormel and colleagues emphasizes that the relationship between neuroticism and common mental disorders is complex: neuroticism can operate as a broad marker of nonspecific risk, while overlap, shared causes, current state, and prior disorder can also contribute to the association.
This distinction is clinically important. If someone has persistent, impairing anxiety symptoms, the treatment question should be about the anxiety presentation and its mechanisms—not about erasing a personality label. A meta-analysis by Cuijpers and colleagues found that transdiagnostic psychological treatments for anxiety and depression were probably effective in the short term across 45 randomized trials. That evidence concerns defined symptom problems and psychological treatment, not a generic “cure for being neurotic.”
4. Measured personality traits are relatively stable, but not immutable
Personality traits describe typical patterns across time and situations; they are not momentary moods. Stability is part of what makes a trait a trait. Yet stable does not mean fixed. A large meta-analysis by Bleidorn and colleagues synthesized longitudinal studies involving hundreds of thousands of observations and concluded that personality traits show both stability and developmental change across the lifespan. Emotional stability—the inverse pole of neuroticism—showed meaningful mean-level increases across the lifespan in that synthesis.
Newer evidence makes the same point at the individual level. A 2026 meta-analysis by Haehner and colleagues found significant individual differences in personality-trait change across the lifespan, with especially pronounced individual differences for neuroticism. Two people of the same age can therefore follow different trajectories even when the population has an average developmental trend.
Another way to state the evidence is that personality contains both persistent and changing components. Anusic and Schimmack estimated that most reliable variance in personality traits reflected stable influences, while a smaller but meaningful portion reflected changing influences. This is a better model than either extreme: personality is neither a daily weather report nor a life sentence.
5. A clinical disorder can improve without turning into a personality verdict
When an anxiety disorder, depressive disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, trauma-related condition, or another clinical problem is present, improvement is judged against that condition’s symptoms, functioning, course, and treatment goals. A person does not need to become a different “type of human” for treatment to matter. They may sleep better, avoid less, function more freely, experience fewer symptoms, or respond differently to distress while still recognizing familiar aspects of their temperament.
The reverse is equally important: changing a few habits does not prove that a disorder was present in the first place. Symptom, risk factor, screening score, diagnosis, and everyday label remain different categories.
What personality-change research actually shows
The question “Can personality change?” sounds simple, but researchers measure several different forms of change. Confusing them can make headlines sound stronger than the evidence.
Rank-order stability
Rank-order stability asks whether people keep roughly the same relative position compared with one another. If Alex is more emotionally reactive than most peers at age 25 and remains more reactive than most peers at age 35, rank ordering can be stable even if Alex’s absolute level has changed. Bleidorn et al. found that rank-order stability increases through early life and reaches a plateau in young adulthood rather than continuing to rise indefinitely.
Mean-level change
Mean-level change asks whether the average level of a trait shifts in a population. A population can become somewhat more emotionally stable on average while individuals still differ greatly from one another. This is one reason the claim “neuroticism decreases with age” should never be converted into a prediction about one specific person.
Individual change
Individual change asks whether particular people deviate from the average trajectory. Haehner et al. found substantial individual differences in trait change, including neuroticism. This is the level most relevant to someone wondering whether their own long-term pattern can change, but it also means there is no universal timetable or guaranteed direction.
Change during intervention
Intervention research provides a different kind of evidence. A systematic review and meta-analysis by Roberts and colleagues identified 207 studies tracking personality-trait measures during interventions. Across an average intervention period of about 24 weeks, trait measures changed, and emotional stability was the domain showing the largest changes. The authors also reported that changes persisted in follow-up samples. These findings support the possibility of trait change; they do not imply that every intervention changes personality or that every participant changes to the same degree.
A large randomized study by Stieger and colleagues tested a three-month digital personality-change intervention in 1,523 participants. Self-reported changes generally moved in intended directions, and observers detected significant change for some goals. A later follow-up report by Stieger, Flückiger, and Allemand found that some intended changes were maintained one year later, although follow-up attrition was substantial and the one-year sample was much smaller. That makes the study useful evidence for possibility, not a promise about any individual.
The 2026 systematic review by Wright and colleagues examined 99 articles on nonclinical interventions targeting neuroticism or related constructs. The review concluded that targeted interventions can produce desired change, while also emphasizing major heterogeneity in strategies and continuing uncertainty about mechanisms. That combination is important: the field has evidence of malleability and still has unresolved questions about exactly what produces durable change, for whom, and under what conditions.
Why “stop being neurotic” is often the wrong target
The phrase sounds like a goal, but it does not specify a behavior, symptom, context, mechanism, or outcome. That creates three practical problems.
It turns a variable pattern into an identity. “I am neurotic” is broader than “I become highly anxious when I cannot get certainty.”
It hides the target. If the main problem is rumination, avoidance, sleep disruption, panic, compulsive checking, relationship reassurance, perfectionistic self-criticism, or depressed mood, each requires a more specific formulation.
It makes progress hard to measure. You cannot easily measure “less neurotic” in everyday speech, but you can track frequency of checking, time lost to rumination, avoidance, distress intensity, sleep, conflict, or functioning.
The word can also carry shame. Shame encourages global self-judgments: weak, difficult, irrational, exhausting, too sensitive. Psychological change is easier to reason about when the unit of analysis is observable: what happens, when it happens, what you fear or expect, what you do next, and what the consequences are.
If you are deciding whether the label itself is useful, compare it with the more precise language in Neurotic Behavior: Meaning, Examples, and What It Does Not Diagnose and Neurotic Personality: What People Mean and How It Differs From Neuroticism.
A better question: what exactly are you trying to change?
You do not need a self-diagnosis to make the question more precise. Start by converting the label into an episode that another person could understand without ever hearing the word neurotic.
Describe the trigger
What happened immediately before the reaction? Was there uncertainty, criticism, a bodily sensation, a delayed reply, an ambiguous facial expression, a decision, a mistake, an upcoming task, a memory, a social comparison, or simply accumulated fatigue? The same person may react very differently across triggers.
Describe the internal response
What showed up in your mind and body? Examples include catastrophic predictions, repetitive review, self-doubt, shame, anger, tightness, racing heart, restlessness, nausea, or an urge to escape. These experiences are data. They are not a diagnosis by themselves.
Describe the behavior that follows
What do you actually do? Check? Ask? Avoid? Delay? Research for hours? Apologize repeatedly? Seek certainty? Control another person? Work excessively? Withdraw? Rehearse conversations? These behaviors are often more actionable than a personality label. For a focused discussion of repetitive thought, see Neurotic Thinking: Worry, Rumination, Catastrophizing, and Self-Doubt.
Describe the short-term payoff
What does the behavior accomplish immediately? It may reduce anxiety for a few minutes, produce a sense of control, avoid embarrassment, prevent conflict, or create temporary certainty. Understanding the payoff helps explain why a pattern repeats without assuming that it is irrational or pathological.
Describe the long-term cost
Does the pattern consume time, narrow your life, exhaust relationships, interfere with work or study, disturb sleep, prevent decisions, increase conflict, or keep you dependent on reassurance? Functional impact often matters more than whether the behavior looks “neurotic” from the outside.
Describe the time course
Has this been present for two days, six months, or most of your adult life? Is it episodic, situation-specific, or pervasive? Did it intensify after a major event? Did it recede before? Time course helps distinguish state-like distress from a more enduring pattern and is central to any clinical assessment.
Different patterns imply different kinds of change
Worry and rumination
If you use neurotic to mean that your mind repeatedly generates threats, mistakes, counterfactuals, or future problems, the key distinction is between ordinary problem solving and repetitive negative thinking. Worry and rumination can be influenced by stress, mood, habit, and clinical conditions. Their presence alone does not identify which explanation applies.
Progress may mean spending less time trapped in repetitive thought, recognizing when thinking has stopped producing new information, or returning attention to current tasks. Whether that is self-guided coping or part of treatment depends on severity, persistence, and the underlying problem.
Checking and reassurance seeking
Checking and reassurance can occur in ordinary uncertainty, health concerns, relationships, generalized anxiety, obsessive-compulsive presentations, and many other contexts. Frequency alone is not enough; the content, trigger, perceived threat, sense of necessity, relief pattern, time burden, and impairment matter.
If checking or reassurance becomes repetitive, the useful question is what function it serves and what happens after relief fades. That is more informative than deciding that the behavior is “neurotic.” Our Neurotic Habits article explains why repeated everyday patterns deserve closer description before interpretation.
Perfectionistic control and self-criticism
A person can be meticulous, ambitious, cautious, self-critical, or uncomfortable with mistakes for many reasons. The clinically relevant question is not whether the trait looks neurotic. It is whether rigid standards, fear of mistakes, control strategies, or self-attack are creating distress or impairment and whether another construct better explains the pattern.
The same outward behavior can even have different functions in different settings. Rechecking a report because accuracy matters in a safety-critical job is not psychologically equivalent to being unable to stop checking after the work has been verified.
Emotional reactivity
Some people experience negative emotions more quickly or intensely than others. Trait neuroticism is one framework for studying stable individual differences in negative emotionality, but the everyday label does not tell you a person’s measured trait level. Reactivity can also rise temporarily with stress, sleep disruption, illness, conflict, or a current mental-health episode.
Change may therefore occur at several levels: fewer triggering situations, different interpretations, different behavioral responses, improved recovery after emotion, lower symptom burden, or a gradual shift in trait measures. These are related but not identical outcomes.
Can therapy make someone less “neurotic”?
Therapy should target a defined problem or process rather than an insult-like identity label. A therapist may work with persistent worry, avoidance, panic, depressed mood, emotional avoidance, self-criticism, compulsive behavior, trauma responses, relationship patterns, or another formulation supported by assessment. When those problems improve, a person may describe themselves as “less neurotic,” but the clinical target was more precise.
Personality-trait measures can also change during treatment. Roberts et al. found the largest intervention-associated changes in emotional stability, and people treated for anxiety disorders showed particularly large changes in the reviewed literature. A more recent randomized study by Stumpp and colleagues examined neuroticism during the Unified Protocol in adults with emotional disorders. In that study, greater reductions in measured neuroticism emerged during the later part of the 12-session condition, and the authors distinguished early state-level shifts from the possibility of more lasting trait change.
That result should be interpreted at the level of the study. It involved 70 adults with emotional disorders and a specific transdiagnostic treatment. It does not establish a universal number of sessions, prove that neuroticism is itself a disorder, or show that every person who calls themselves neurotic needs the Unified Protocol.
What about medication?
There is no medication indication called “being neurotic.” Medication decisions belong to specific symptoms and diagnosed conditions, along with medical history, benefits, risks, interactions, and individual circumstances. If someone is using the label neurotic to describe severe anxiety, depression, panic, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, insomnia, or another clinical problem, the appropriate question is whether that specific problem warrants assessment and what evidence-based options apply to it.
A change in a personality-trait score during treatment also does not turn the trait into a medication target by itself. Trait measures, symptom measures, and diagnoses answer different questions.
How quickly can change happen?
There is no single timeline because the word neurotic can refer to different levels of change. A stress-driven state may improve as circumstances and recovery change. A habit may start changing once its triggers and consequences are understood, yet become reliable only through repeated practice. Symptoms may respond over a course of treatment. Personality-trait change is typically studied across months, years, or longer developmental periods.
Intervention research illustrates the range. The Roberts et al. review summarized changes over an average of roughly 24 weeks. Stieger et al. tested a three-month digital intervention, with later work examining maintenance one year after the intervention. Stumpp et al. found different patterns across earlier and later treatment phases. None of these timelines can be converted into a personal deadline.
Change is also rarely linear. Stressful weeks can temporarily increase worry or reactivity without erasing longer-term improvement. A useful outcome measure should therefore match the target and be observed across enough time to distinguish a bad day from a meaningful trend.
What does realistic change look like?
Realistic change does not require becoming permanently calm, never worrying, never feeling jealous, never asking for reassurance, or never reacting strongly. Negative emotion is part of ordinary human functioning. The relevant question is whether your responses are flexible enough for the situation and whether they allow you to keep functioning, relating, deciding, resting, and acting according to your goals.
Depending on the pattern, improvement might look like recovering faster after stress, checking once instead of repeatedly, tolerating an unanswered message without escalating, making a decision without endless review, allowing a mistake without hours of self-attack, spending less time ruminating, or continuing an important activity while anxious. These are specific changes. “Become a non-neurotic person” is not.
This is also why labels can lag behind behavior. Someone may continue to think of themselves as neurotic after their actual patterns have changed. Conversely, someone may reject the label while still experiencing severe distress. Identity language is not a reliable outcome measure.
When should you look beyond self-help?
A closer assessment is reasonable when the specific problem is persistent, difficult to control, escalating, or substantially interfering with sleep, work, study, relationships, health, decision-making, or daily activities. The purpose of assessment is to identify the actual problem—not to confirm that someone is a “neurotic person.”
It is especially useful to seek professional input when symptoms are severe, when avoidance is expanding, when panic or intrusive experiences are dominating daily life, when compulsive behaviors consume substantial time, when depressed mood is persistent, when substance use is becoming a coping strategy, or when physical symptoms could have a medical cause. Different presentations call for different assessments and treatments.
If you are unsure whether your concern is a trait, a symptom, or a label, How Do I Know If I’m Neurotic? Signs, Limits of the Label, and Better Questions to Ask offers a structured way to sort those categories without self-diagnosing.
A precise answer to “Can I stop being neurotic?”
If by neurotic you mean a temporary state of high worry or reactivity, that state can change. If you mean learned habits such as repeated checking, avoidance, reassurance seeking, or self-critical review, those patterns can change. If you mean symptoms of a specific mental-health condition, many evidence-based treatments can reduce symptoms and improve functioning. If you mean measured neuroticism, personality research shows substantial stability alongside real developmental and intervention-related change.
What you cannot responsibly conclude is that an everyday label identifies a disorder, fixes your future, or tells you which treatment you need. The useful task is translation: replace “I am neurotic” with a description precise enough to test, understand, and change.
For the broader question of whether being neurotic is inherently bad, including context and possible trade-offs, see Is Being Neurotic Bad? Costs, Context, and Possible Strengths. For language that sounds clinical but is often used loosely, see Neurotic Anxiety: What the Phrase Means and What Modern Psychology Calls It Instead.
Frequently asked questions
Can you completely stop being neurotic?
You can reduce or change many experiences people describe as neurotic, but “completely stop being neurotic” is not a clinical endpoint. The term is too broad. A better endpoint is specific: less rumination, less avoidance, fewer repeated checks, lower symptom burden, better emotional recovery, improved functioning, or a measured change in a personality trait.
Is neuroticism permanent?
No personality trait is perfectly fixed. Neuroticism is relatively stable, which means people often maintain meaningful individual differences over time, but longitudinal and intervention research shows that trait levels can change. Bleidorn et al. and Haehner et al. provide large-scale evidence for both stability and change.
Does high neuroticism mean I have a mental illness?
No. Neuroticism is a personality trait, not a diagnosis. Higher neuroticism is associated with greater risk for several common mental-health problems at the population level, but Ormel et al. show that this relationship is complex and nonspecific. Risk association does not establish a disorder in an individual.
Can therapy change neuroticism?
Trait measures can change during psychological interventions. The Roberts et al. meta-analysis found especially notable change in emotional stability, and more recent studies continue to investigate when and how neuroticism changes. Therapy, however, is selected for a specific clinical formulation or treatment goal rather than for the everyday label “neurotic person.”
Can stress make me feel more neurotic for a while?
Yes. Stress can increase worry, irritability, vigilance, self-doubt, sleep problems, and emotional reactivity. A state increase does not prove that your long-term personality has permanently changed. Time course, context, and recovery matter.
If I worry a lot, should I try to change my personality?
Not necessarily. First identify the worry itself: what it is about, how frequent and controllable it is, what you do in response, and whether it causes distress or impairment. The appropriate target may be stress, a learned response pattern, a symptom process, a clinical disorder, or nothing that requires treatment.
Can a personality test tell me whether I am neurotic?
A validated personality measure can estimate neuroticism as a trait dimension. It does not diagnose a “neurotic person,” and a generic online quiz may not be a validated measure at all. Screening, personality measurement, and diagnosis are different processes.
What should I say instead of “I’m neurotic”?
Use the most concrete sentence you can: “I spend hours replaying conversations,” “I ask for reassurance repeatedly when I feel uncertain,” “I become intensely anxious when plans change,” “I check my work long after it is complete,” or “I have been unusually irritable and worried since this stressor began.” Specific descriptions create better questions and better decisions.
Related Articles
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). About DSM-5-TR.
Anusic, I., & Schimmack, U. (2016). Stability and change of personality traits, self-esteem, and well-being: Introducing the meta-analytic stability and change model of retest correlations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(5), 766–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000066.
Bleidorn, W., Schwaba, T., Zheng, A., Hopwood, C. J., Sosa, S. S., Roberts, B. W., & Briley, D. A. (2022). Personality stability and change: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 148(7–8), 588–619. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000365.
Cambridge University Press & Assessment. (n.d.). Neurotic. Cambridge Dictionary.
Cuijpers, P., Miguel, C., Ciharova, M., Ebert, D., Harrer, M., & Karyotaki, E. (2023). Transdiagnostic treatment of depression and anxiety: A meta-analysis. Psychological Medicine, 53(14), 6535–6546. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291722003841.
Haehner, P., Hopwood, C. J., Schellenberg, L., Schwaba, T., & Bleidorn, W. (2026). Individual differences in personality trait changes across the lifespan: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 152(4), 420–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000525.
Ormel, J., Jeronimus, B. F., Kotov, R., Riese, H., Bos, E. H., Hankin, B., Rosmalen, J. G. M., & Oldehinkel, A. J. (2013). Neuroticism and common mental disorders: Meaning and utility of a complex relationship. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(5), 686–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.04.003.
Roberts, B. W., Luo, J., Briley, D. A., Chow, P. I., Su, R., & Hill, P. L. (2017). A systematic review of personality trait change through intervention. Psychological Bulletin, 143(2), 117–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000088.
Stieger, M., Flückiger, C., & Allemand, M. (2024). One year later: Longer-term maintenance effects of a digital intervention to change personality traits. Journal of Personality, 92(5), 1424–1437. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12898.
Stieger, M., Flückiger, C., Rüegger, D., Kowatsch, T., Roberts, B. W., & Allemand, M. (2021). Changing personality traits with the help of a digital personality change intervention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(8), e2017548118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2017548118.
Stumpp, N. E., Southward, M. W., Hines, A., Kushner, M. L., Schäuffele, C., Fruhbauerova, M., Bridges, E., Rahman, A., & Sauer-Zavala, S. (2026). When and under what circumstances does neuroticism change in the Unified Protocol? Psychotherapy Research, 36(4), 785–796. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2025.2521779.
World Health Organization. (2024). Clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements for ICD-11 mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders.
Wright, A. J., Haehner, P., Hopwood, C. J., & Bleidorn, W. (2026). A systematic review and taxonomy of neuroticism interventions for the general public. Personality Science, 7, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/27000710261421531.