Neuroticism vs Anxiety: Personality Trait vs Emotional State and Disorder
Updated: Oct 8
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 30, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Neuroticism and anxiety overlap substantially, but they describe different levels of psychological experience. Neuroticism is a broad, dimensional personality trait: a relatively stable tendency to experience negative emotions more readily or intensely across situations. Anxiety can mean a temporary emotional state, an enduring tendency to become anxious, a set of symptoms measured by a questionnaire, or a clinical disorder. Those meanings should not be collapsed into a single label.
The distinction matters because the same word can move between personality science and clinical language without warning. A person can be high in neuroticism and have no anxiety disorder. A person can experience severe situational anxiety without being generally high in neuroticism. A person can meet criteria for an anxiety disorder while having a personality profile that cannot be reduced to one Big Five score. A test score, a momentary state, a personality trait, and a diagnosis answer different questions.
For the broad personality-science definition, see Neuroticism: What It Is in the Big Five Personality Model. For the empirical association between neuroticism and anxiety outcomes, see Neuroticism and Anxiety: What Research Shows. This article focuses on the comparison itself: what neuroticism is, what different forms of anxiety are, where the constructs overlap, where they separate, and why the measurement instrument changes the answer.
Neuroticism vs Anxiety: The Short Answer
Neuroticism is a broad personality disposition. State anxiety is a temporary emotional condition. Trait anxiety is a relatively enduring tendency to experience anxiety, making it conceptually closer to neuroticism but still dependent on how it is defined and measured. Anxiety symptoms are experiences such as worry, apprehension, tension, physiological arousal, or avoidance measured dimensionally. An anxiety disorder is a clinical syndrome defined by a disorder-specific pattern of symptoms, persistence, distress or impairment, context, and differential diagnosis.
The central rule is simple: higher neuroticism increases the statistical likelihood of anxiety, but it does not equal anxiety and it does not diagnose an anxiety disorder. Neuroticism is broader than anxious emotion because major personality models include other forms of negative emotionality, such as sadness, irritability, self-consciousness, vulnerability, or emotional volatility. Anxiety is therefore one important part of the neuroticism landscape, not the entire landscape.
This is visible in the instruments themselves. The NEO PI-R Neuroticism domain includes an Anxiety facet alongside Angry Hostility, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Impulsiveness, and Vulnerability (Conner et al., 2004). The BFI-2 labels the corresponding broad Big Five domain Negative Emotionality and represents it with Anxiety, Depression, and Emotional Volatility facets (Soto & John, 2017). A broad neuroticism score can therefore be elevated for different reasons in different people.
The Core Difference Is the Level of Description
Neuroticism belongs to personality science. It describes a relatively enduring pattern of individual differences across time and situations. Benjamin Lahey defined neuroticism as relatively stable tendencies to respond with negative emotions to threat, frustration, or loss (Lahey, 2009). The construct is dimensional: people differ by degree rather than falling naturally into a healthy-versus-disordered category.
Anxiety can describe an event occurring now, a recurring style of emotional response, the severity of symptoms during a particular time window, or a psychiatric condition. The National Institute of Mental Health notes that feeling anxious is a normal part of life, whereas anxiety disorders involve more than occasional worry or fear and can persist and interfere with daily functioning (NIMH, Anxiety Disorders). Thus, asking “Is this person anxious?” is incomplete until the level of description is specified.
This creates four distinct questions. Personality assessment asks how prone someone is to negative emotionality in general. State assessment asks how anxious someone feels now or in a defined situation. Symptom assessment asks how much anxiety-related difficulty the person has experienced over a defined period. Diagnostic assessment asks whether the full pattern meets criteria for a particular disorder. The same person can receive very different answers to those four questions without contradiction.
What Neuroticism Measures
In the Big Five tradition, neuroticism is a broad domain covering individual differences in emotional reactivity and susceptibility to distress. It is often described as the opposite pole of emotional stability. That bipolar structure does not mean that someone low in neuroticism never feels anxiety. Emotional stability refers to the lower end of a broad trait dimension, not immunity from fear, worry, grief, anger, or physiological arousal when circumstances evoke them.
Neuroticism is relatively stable, not immutable. Personality scores show rank-order stability, developmental change, and within-person fluctuation. A score is therefore best interpreted as an estimate of a person's typical position on a trait dimension under the conditions and instrument used. It is not a biological diagnosis, a fixed essence, or a prediction that a particular emotional episode will occur.
Facet structure matters. In the NEO tradition, anxiety is only one of several facets under Neuroticism. In the BFI-2, the related broad domain is called Negative Emotionality, and Anxiety is one of three facets. This is why the phrase “neuroticism is anxiety” is too narrow. For the full facet map, see Neuroticism Facets: Anxiety, Anger, Depression, Self-Consciousness, Impulsiveness, and Vulnerability.
What Anxiety Can Mean
Anxiety is not one construct used in one way. Research papers, screening tools, clinical interviews, and everyday conversation can use the same word for different phenomena. The most useful distinction is among state anxiety, trait anxiety, symptoms or screening scores, and anxiety disorders.
State anxiety
State anxiety is a temporary emotional condition. It rises and falls with circumstances, perceived threat, uncertainty, anticipation, bodily sensations, and interpretation. A person who is calm in most settings can become highly anxious before surgery, an examination, a difficult conversation, turbulence on a flight, or an unexpected health scare. State anxiety therefore tells us about a person-in-a-situation rather than personality alone.
A higher neuroticism level can make anxious states more frequent, intense, or easily triggered on average, but the relationship is probabilistic. Situational intensity matters. A low-neuroticism person can have high state anxiety under genuine threat, and a high-neuroticism person can feel calm in a safe or familiar moment.
Trait anxiety
Trait anxiety refers to a relatively enduring tendency to experience anxiety across situations. Conceptually, this is much closer to neuroticism than state anxiety is. Historically, some theories and measures have treated trait anxiety and neuroticism as nearly interchangeable. Modern psychometrics shows why that shortcut can be misleading: the observed overlap depends strongly on item content and measurement model.
The best-known example is the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Trait scale, or STAI-T. A meta-analysis of 388 studies and 31,021 participants found that STAI-T scores were similarly strongly related to anxiety and depressive symptom severity, and the authors concluded that the scale may operate more like a broad measure of negative affectivity than a highly specific measure of anxiety (Knowles & Olatunji, 2020). An earlier psychometric study likewise found the STAI-T total score more strongly related to depression than to anxiety in the examined data (Bados et al., 2010).
This does not make trait anxiety meaningless. It shows that the label printed on a questionnaire is not enough to establish what its score represents. Trait anxiety and neuroticism can overlap strongly while remaining theoretically and operationally distinguishable across instruments.
Anxiety symptoms and screening scores
Anxiety symptoms are dimensional experiences. A questionnaire may ask about worry, tension, restlessness, panic-like sensations, avoidance, fear, concentration difficulty, sleep disturbance, or other symptoms over a specified period. The resulting score estimates symptom severity according to that measure. It does not automatically establish a psychiatric diagnosis.
A symptom score can also be influenced by the time window. Someone experiencing an acutely stressful month may endorse many anxiety symptoms even if their long-term personality profile is closer to average. Conversely, a person with high neuroticism may have relatively few current anxiety symptoms during a stable period. Time frame is therefore a central difference between personality and symptom measurement.
Anxiety disorders
An anxiety disorder is a clinical construct, not the high end of a Big Five scale. Diagnosis depends on a disorder-specific symptom pattern, duration, severity, functional impact, context, and exclusion or differential considerations. For example, NIMH describes generalized anxiety disorder as persistent anxiety or dread that interferes with life, with diagnostic assessment considering the persistence and control of worry and associated symptoms (NIMH, Generalized Anxiety Disorder).
Neuroticism can contribute statistical vulnerability across multiple disorders, but it cannot determine which disorder is present, whether diagnostic criteria are met, or what treatment is indicated. Those are disorder-specific questions. The cluster article Neuroticism and Mental Health: Why the Trait Is a Transdiagnostic Risk Factor explains the broader risk-factor perspective without turning the personality trait into a clinical category.
Neuroticism and State Anxiety Are Especially Different
The easiest distinction is between neuroticism and state anxiety. Neuroticism aims to describe a general pattern across situations and time. State anxiety describes current or recent emotional activation. They can correlate because people who are dispositionally more sensitive to threat often report more anxious moments, yet the constructs live on different time scales.
Imagine two people waiting for an important medical result. One typically scores low in neuroticism; the other typically scores high. Both may experience intense state anxiety because the situation is uncertain and personally important. Their immediate anxiety tells us little about whether their broad personality scores are similar. Conversely, after the situation resolves, state anxiety may fall sharply while their personality rankings remain relatively stable.
This distinction also explains why a single anxious day should not be used to infer a personality profile. State measures are designed to capture fluctuation. Personality measures generally ask respondents to describe what they are like in general or typically, and their interpretation depends on broader patterns.
Neuroticism and Trait Anxiety Are Closer, but Still Not Identical
Trait anxiety creates the hardest boundary problem because both constructs describe relatively enduring vulnerability to negative emotion. In some theoretical traditions, the terms approach synonymy. In others, trait anxiety is treated as a narrower tendency centered on apprehension and threat, whereas neuroticism covers a wider family of negative emotional tendencies.
Measurement evidence makes a universal one-to-one translation impossible. If a trait-anxiety scale contains broad distress, sadness, self-deprecation, and low-positive-affect content, it may correlate extremely strongly with neuroticism. If a measure isolates anxiety-specific cognitive and somatic content more successfully, the overlap can be smaller and more interpretable.
The State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety, or STICSA, illustrates this second approach. It separates state and trait anxiety and distinguishes cognitive from somatic anxiety. Validation work found stronger convergence with anxiety measures and better discrimination from depression than the STAI in the studied samples (Grös et al., 2007). Later research also supported the STICSA structure and reported stronger divergent validity than the STAI, particularly for somatic anxiety scales (Tindall et al., 2021).
The conclusion is measurement-specific: “trait anxiety” cannot be treated as a universal numerical substitute for neuroticism. The reserved cluster page NTM-100 owns the narrower trait-anxiety comparison and will be linked here after its English canonical becomes live.
Neuroticism and Anxiety Disorders Are Related at the Risk Level
The research relationship between neuroticism and anxiety disorders is strong at the group level. A major meta-analysis of 175 studies found that diagnostic groups for anxiety and depressive disorders generally showed elevated neuroticism, though effect sizes varied across conditions (Kotov et al., 2010). That pattern supports neuroticism as a broad transdiagnostic correlate and vulnerability marker rather than a disorder-specific signature.
Longitudinal evidence strengthens the temporal part of the argument while also showing why causal language must remain careful. A meta-analysis of 59 longitudinal or prospective studies with 443,313 participants found that neuroticism predicted later anxiety, depression, and nonspecific distress. Adjustment for baseline symptoms and psychiatric history substantially reduced the associations, although adjusted prospective associations remained (Jeronimus et al., 2016).
The evidence therefore supports statements such as “higher neuroticism is associated with greater risk” or “neuroticism can precede later anxiety problems.” It does not justify “high neuroticism causes an anxiety disorder” as a universal individual rule. Reviews describe a more complex set of possibilities, including shared causes, spectrum overlap, vulnerability pathways, state effects, and potential scar effects (Ormel et al., 2013).
For a deeper evidence review of the association itself, including prospective findings and clinical limits, see Neuroticism and Anxiety: What Research Shows.
Why Neuroticism and Anxiety Overlap So Strongly
The overlap is not mysterious. Anxiety is one of the most characteristic negative emotional experiences captured by many neuroticism measures. People who perceive more situations as threatening, experience stronger distress, recover more slowly from negative emotion, or engage more readily in worry and rumination are likely to score higher on both broad neuroticism measures and many anxiety measures.
A second source of overlap is item content. Personality scales sometimes include words such as anxious, tense, easily stressed, or worried. Anxiety scales may include general distress, low confidence, sadness, or other content that extends beyond fear and apprehension. When two instruments ask overlapping questions, high correlations partly reflect real construct similarity and partly reflect operational overlap.
A third source is shared liability. Neuroticism and anxiety problems can reflect common genetic, developmental, cognitive, environmental, and stress-related influences. A fourth source is state contamination: current distress can influence how people describe their usual personality. These mechanisms can coexist, which is why a single correlation cannot tell us which causal model is correct.
The relationship with stress is one pathway through which these patterns become visible. For the distinction between trait vulnerability, perceived stress, reactivity, and recovery, see Neuroticism and Stress: Perceived Stress, Reactivity, and Recovery.
Why Neuroticism and Anxiety Are Not Interchangeable
First, neuroticism is broader in emotional content. Anxiety centers on apprehension, threat, fear, tension, or anxious arousal. Neuroticism can also include sadness, irritability, emotional volatility, self-consciousness, and vulnerability. Different facet configurations can produce similar broad domain scores.
Second, the constructs operate on different time scales. State anxiety can change within minutes. Symptom severity can change over days or weeks. Trait anxiety and neuroticism aim to capture more persistent individual differences. An anxiety disorder can remit, recur, or vary in severity without implying that the person's broad personality structure changes at the same rate.
Third, their clinical status differs. Neuroticism is a normal-range dimensional personality trait. Anxiety itself is a normal emotion. Anxiety disorders are clinical conditions. A high personality score and a diagnosis are not two versions of the same classification.
Fourth, their measurement models differ. A NEO PI-R Neuroticism score, BFI-2 Negative Emotionality score, IPIP-based neuroticism score, Eysenck Neuroticism score, STAI-T score, STAI-S score, and STICSA score are generated by different item sets and scoring systems. Their numerical values cannot be directly cross-walked without validated linking evidence.
Measurement Changes the Answer
Statements about neuroticism versus anxiety become much more precise when the instrument is named. Researchers should report the measure, version, scoring method, sample, and relevant norms rather than treating “high neuroticism” or “high anxiety” as universal categories.
NEO PI-R and NEO-FFI
The NEO PI-R measures a broad Neuroticism domain with six lower-order facets, including Anxiety. This makes the hierarchy explicit: anxiety-related content is nested within a broader domain rather than defining the whole domain. The NEO-FFI is a shorter inventory focused on the broad Five-Factor Model domains and does not provide the same facet-level resolution as the full NEO PI-R. A high domain score therefore should not be read as “high anxiety” without examining what the particular instrument actually measured.
BFI-2 Negative Emotionality
The BFI-2 uses the label Negative Emotionality for the broad domain corresponding closely to neuroticism and includes Anxiety, Depression, and Emotional Volatility facets (Soto & John, 2017). The Berkeley Personality Lab likewise lists Negative Emotionality as one of the five BFI-2 domains (Berkeley Personality Lab, BFI-2). In BFI-2 reporting, calling the domain “anxiety” would erase two-thirds of its facet structure.
IPIP measures
The International Personality Item Pool is a public-domain item pool containing thousands of items and hundreds of scales, including multiple Big Five and neuroticism-related measures (International Personality Item Pool). “IPIP neuroticism” therefore is not one universal scale unless the specific inventory and scoring key are identified. Score interpretation depends on the chosen IPIP measure and reference data.
Eysenck measures
Eysenck personality inventories include a Neuroticism dimension within a personality framework that is historically and structurally different from the Big Five. Eysenck Neuroticism is strongly related to modern neuroticism constructs, but scores from Eysenck measures should not be treated as numerically interchangeable with NEO, BFI-2, or IPIP scores.
STAI state and trait scales
The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory separates state and trait forms by design. The State scale asks about current anxiety-like experience; the Trait scale asks about more general tendencies. The distinction is conceptually useful, yet the trait scale's discriminant validity has been repeatedly questioned because it captures substantial general negative affect and depressive content (Knowles & Olatunji, 2020; Bados et al., 2010).
STICSA
The STICSA separates state versus trait anxiety and cognitive versus somatic anxiety. Its validation literature provides an example of how anxiety measurement can be designed to improve specificity relative to general negative affect (Grös et al., 2007). This is important when a research question is specifically about anxiety rather than broad distress.
For a dedicated overview of personality testing and score interpretation, see Neuroticism Test: What It Measures and How to Interpret Results.
How to Read a High Neuroticism Score Without Turning It Into an Anxiety Diagnosis
A high neuroticism score means that, on the specific personality measure used, the person endorsed a pattern associated with greater negative emotionality relative to that scale's scoring framework or reference group. It may suggest greater proneness to worry, distress, emotional reactivity, or other negative emotions depending on the instrument and facet composition.
It does not tell you that the person currently feels anxious. It does not establish that anxiety is the dominant part of the person's profile. It does not establish a psychiatric diagnosis. It does not specify severity, duration, impairment, avoidance, panic, phobic fear, or the content of worry. Those require separate assessment.
Raw scores and percentiles must also be interpreted in context. A percentile is relative to a particular normative sample. A raw score only has meaning within the scale range and scoring key of that instrument. “High” on one test cannot be carried over to another test without evidence that the scores have been formally linked.
How to Read a High Anxiety Score
A high anxiety score is equally dependent on the instrument. A state-anxiety scale may indicate strong anxiety at the time of assessment. A trait-anxiety scale may indicate a broader tendency toward anxious or negative affective responding. A symptom screener may indicate elevated symptoms over a defined period and suggest that further assessment could be useful. None of these scores, by themselves, automatically establish a diagnosis.
The most important questions are therefore: Which instrument was used? What exactly does it measure? What time frame does it ask about? What scoring method was used? Which norms or thresholds, if any, apply to the relevant population? Was the tool designed for personality research, symptom screening, clinical assessment, or another purpose?
Can Current Anxiety Raise a Neuroticism Score?
Yes, current emotional state can influence self-reported personality scores. Personality questionnaires ask people to summarize themselves, and active distress can change what comes to mind, how recent experiences are weighted, and how items are interpreted. This is one reason the relationship between neuroticism and psychopathology cannot be understood only as personality causing later symptoms.
Ormel and colleagues reviewed several explanatory models, including vulnerability, common-cause, spectrum, state, and scar models, and concluded that no single model accounts for the full neuroticism–common-mental-disorder relationship (Ormel et al., 2013). The prospective meta-analysis by Jeronimus and colleagues further showed that adjusting for baseline symptoms and psychiatric history reduced neuroticism's prospective associations substantially (Jeronimus et al., 2016).
This means a neuroticism score collected during a severe anxiety episode should be interpreted as a personality estimate obtained in that clinical state, not as a timeless measurement untouched by current symptoms.
Does Neuroticism Cause Anxiety?
The strongest answer is that neuroticism is a vulnerability marker and prospective risk factor, while a simple deterministic causal statement is not supported. Higher neuroticism often precedes later anxiety problems, but the association is partly explained by prior symptoms, psychiatric history, shared causes, and measurement overlap. Multiple pathways can operate at the same time.
At the individual level, high neuroticism is neither necessary nor sufficient for an anxiety disorder. “Not necessary” means anxiety disorders can occur in people who are not especially high on a broad neuroticism measure. “Not sufficient” means many people high in neuroticism never develop an anxiety disorder. Risk factors change probabilities; they do not function as diagnoses.
Related Concepts That Are Easy to Confuse
Emotional stability
Emotional stability is commonly the opposite pole of neuroticism in Big Five language. It describes lower typical negative emotional reactivity on the same broad dimension. It does not mean permanent calm or the inability to experience anxiety.
Negative Emotionality
Negative Emotionality is the BFI-2 label for the broad domain corresponding closely to neuroticism. In that model, Anxiety is a facet within Negative Emotionality rather than a synonym for the whole domain.
Negative affect
Negative affect can refer to unpleasant emotional experience in the moment or to a more dispositional tendency, depending on the model and measure. It overlaps with neuroticism and anxiety but should not be substituted for either without naming the instrument. For a dedicated comparison, see Neuroticism and Negative Affect: How the Constructs Overlap and Differ.
Stress
Stress describes responses to demands or stressors and can include emotional, cognitive, behavioral, and physiological components. Anxiety can occur during stress, and neuroticism can be associated with higher perceived stress and reactivity, but stress is not another name for neuroticism or anxiety.
Worry
Worry is a repetitive cognitive process focused on possible future negative outcomes. It is common in anxiety and can correlate with neuroticism, but it is narrower than either construct. The presence of worry alone does not identify a Big Five profile or establish an anxiety disorder.
Three Examples That Show the Difference
Example one: a person usually describes themselves as calm and scores relatively low on neuroticism, but they experience strong anxiety before giving a major public presentation. The immediate state is high anxiety; the broad trait may still be low or average. The situational response does not redefine the personality dimension.
Example two: a person scores high on BFI-2 Negative Emotionality because they endorse anxiety, depressive affect, and emotional volatility, yet they function well and do not have persistent, impairing anxiety symptoms. The personality score is meaningful, but it is not an anxiety-disorder diagnosis.
Example three: a person has persistent, impairing anxiety and receives a clinical diagnosis after a full assessment. Their neuroticism score may be high, average, or somewhere in between. The diagnosis is based on the clinical syndrome, not on whether a Big Five threshold was crossed.
When the Distinction Matters Most
For self-understanding, the distinction prevents a personality label from becoming a clinical conclusion. A person can recognize that they are dispositionally sensitive to negative emotion without assuming that sensitivity is an illness.
For research, the distinction prevents construct contamination. A study of Big Five neuroticism should not silently become a study of state anxiety, and a study using STAI-T should not automatically be described as measuring pure trait anxiety without discussing its known overlap with negative affectivity.
For clinical assessment, the distinction prevents a screening score or personality result from replacing diagnosis. Symptoms, duration, impairment, history, context, medical factors, substance effects, and differential considerations can matter, depending on the presentation.
For longitudinal tracking, the distinction prevents normal short-term fluctuation from being mistaken for personality transformation. State anxiety can move quickly. Symptom severity can improve or worsen over shorter intervals. Personality traits can also change, but change is studied on a different temporal and measurement scale.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is neuroticism a type of anxiety?
No. Neuroticism is a broad personality dimension that includes anxiety-related tendencies among other forms of negative emotionality. Anxiety can be one component of neuroticism, but it can also be a temporary state, a symptom, or part of a clinical disorder.
Does high neuroticism mean I have an anxiety disorder?
No. High neuroticism is a personality result, not a psychiatric diagnosis. It is associated statistically with anxiety disorders, but diagnosis requires disorder-specific clinical information.
Is trait anxiety the same as neuroticism?
They overlap strongly, and some measures capture very similar variance, but they are not universally interchangeable. The answer depends on the theoretical model and instrument. STAI-T, for example, appears to capture broad negative affectivity in addition to anxiety-specific content (Knowles & Olatunji, 2020).
Is anxiety one of the Big Five traits?
Anxiety is not one of the five broad Big Five domains. It appears as lower-order content within the neuroticism or Negative Emotionality domain in major hierarchical instruments. In the BFI-2, Anxiety is one of three Negative Emotionality facets.
Can someone low in neuroticism still have anxiety?
Yes. Situational anxiety can occur at any level of neuroticism, and an anxiety disorder cannot be ruled out by a low or average neuroticism score. Personality changes probability patterns; it does not set an individual ceiling on emotional experience.
Can someone high in neuroticism have little current anxiety?
Yes. Neuroticism is a broad tendency and current anxiety is a state or symptom level. A person can be high on the trait while feeling calm at a particular moment or during a stable period.
Can anxiety make a neuroticism test score look higher?
It can. Current distress may influence self-description, and research on neuroticism and psychopathology includes state-effect explanations. Repeated measurement outside an acute episode can help researchers distinguish enduring trait variance from temporary symptom-related elevation.
Which is more useful: a neuroticism test or an anxiety test?
They answer different questions. A neuroticism measure estimates broad personality variation. A state-anxiety measure estimates current anxiety. A symptom screener estimates recent symptom burden. Clinical assessment addresses diagnosis. The useful tool is the one matched to the question.
Is BFI-2 Negative Emotionality the same as anxiety?
No. Negative Emotionality is the broad BFI-2 domain corresponding closely to neuroticism. Its facets are Anxiety, Depression, and Emotional Volatility, so anxiety is only part of the domain.
Does neuroticism cause generalized anxiety disorder?
Neuroticism is associated with vulnerability to anxiety disorders, including generalized anxiety, but individual causation cannot be inferred from a personality score. Longitudinal evidence supports prospective risk while also showing substantial influence from baseline symptoms, psychiatric history, and other shared factors (Jeronimus et al., 2016).
Related Articles
References
Bados, A., Gómez-Benito, J., & Balaguer, G. (2010). The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Trait version: Does it really measure anxiety? Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(6), 560–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.513295
Conner, K. R., Zhong, Y., & Duberstein, P. R. (2004). NEO-PI-R neuroticism scores in substance-dependent outpatients: Internal consistency and self-partner agreement. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83(1), 75–77. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8301_07
Grös, D. F., Antony, M. M., Simms, L. J., & McCabe, R. E. (2007). Psychometric properties of the State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA): Comparison to the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Psychological Assessment, 19(4), 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.19.4.369
Jeronimus, B. F., Kotov, R., Riese, H., & Ormel, J. (2016). Neuroticism's prospective association with mental disorders halves after adjustment for baseline symptoms and psychiatric history, but the adjusted association hardly decays with time: A meta-analysis on 59 longitudinal/prospective studies with 443,313 participants. Psychological Medicine, 46(14), 2883–2906. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716001653
Knowles, K. A., & Olatunji, B. O. (2020). Specificity of trait anxiety in anxiety and depression: Meta-analysis of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Clinical Psychology Review, 82, 101928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101928
Kotov, R., Gamez, W., Schmidt, F., & Watson, D. (2010). Linking “big” personality traits to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 768–821. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020327
Lahey, B. B. (2009). Public health significance of neuroticism. American Psychologist, 64(4), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015309
National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). Anxiety disorders. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/anxiety-disorders
National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). Generalized anxiety disorder: What you need to know. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/generalized-anxiety-disorder-gad
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
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096
Tindall, I. K., Curtis, G. J., & Locke, V. (2021). Dimensionality and measurement invariance of the State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA) and validity comparison with measures of negative emotionality. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 644889. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.644889