Erratum

Erratum for “Emotional distress and marital adjustment of caregivers: contribution of level of impairment and appraised burden” 18(1), pp. 71–82.

The publishers would like to supply the full reference to the Hankin, Abueg, Gallagher-Thompson & Murphy (1992) paper. It should read:

Hankin, C.S., Abueg, F., Gallagher-Thompson, D., & Murphy, R.T. (1992, October). Caregiver stress: Conceptualizing adaptation of partners of posttraumatic stress disorder combat veterans. Paper presented at the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio, TX.

……..The ϵ′ parameter was calculated according to [18]

……. C ₁₁ ⁽¹⁾ are also given, which were computed as defined by

List of co-authors of ref. [34]:

M. Birk, Ch.J. Bordé, J.W. Brault, L.R. Brown, B. Carli, A.R.H. Cole, K.M. Evenson, A. Fayt, D. Hausamann, J.W.C. Johns, J. Kauppinen, Q. Kou, A.G. Maki, K. Narahari Rao, R.A. Toth, W. Urban, A. Valentin, J. Vergès, G. Wagner, M.H. Wappelhorst, J.S. Wells, B.P. Winnewisser, M. Winnewisser.

Table 2. Ground state spectroscopic parameters (in cm⁻¹) of ¹²³SbD₃, A and B reductions^a.

Parameter	A reduction	B reduction
B	1.490 324 161 (196)	1.490 324 081 (190)
C	1.395 417 97 (142)	1.395 407 25 (142)
D J ×10^5	1.580 068 (104)	1.580 024 (119)
D JK ×10^5	−1.968 192 (442)	−1.969 375 (650)
D K ×10^5	1.896 45 (105)	1.890 17 (109)
H J ×10^9	0.779 94 (107)	0.453 88 (166)
H JK ×10^9	−3.718 64 (504)	−0.679 7 (108)
H KJ ×10^9	5.419 5 (102)	0.082 5 (169)
H K ×10^9	−2.111 9 (239)	0.414 4 (243)
ϵ×10^6	0.0^b	3.872 64 (876)
ϵ J ×10^10	0.0^b	−2.368 4 (893)
ϵ K ×10^10	0.0^b	1.954 (142)
h 3×10^10	1.513 5 (125)	0.0^b
h 3J ×10^14	2.460 (170)	0.0^b
Number of data	11 922	11 950
St. dev. of the fit×10^5	7.44^c	7.25^d
^a Standard uncertainties (1σ) in parentheses refer to the least significant digits.
^b Constrained.
^c rms error of 3 MMW lines alone was 23 kHz; rms error of 474 FIR transitions was 5.9×10^−4 cm^−1; rms error of 7737 GSCD from ν1 and ν3 and of 3708 GSCD from ν2 and ν4 was 1.9×10^−3 cm^−1 and 8.8×10^−4 cm^−1, respectively.
^d rms error of 3 MMW lines alone was 26 kHz; rms error of 498 FIR transitions was 5.1×10^−4 cm^−1; rms error of 7741 GSCD from ν1 and ν3 and of 3708 GSCD from ν2 and ν4 was 1.9×10−3 cm^−1 and 8.7×10^−4 cm^−1, respectively.

Table 3. Comparison of ground state parameters (in cm⁻¹) of ¹²³SbD₃ and ¹²³SbH₃.

	B reduction			A reduction
Parameter	^123SbH3 ^a	^123SbD3	H/D^b	^123SbH3 ^a	^123SbD3	H/D^b
B	2.936 1	1.490 3	1.97	2.936 1	1.490 3	1.97
C	2.788 9	1.395 4	2.00	2.788 9	1.395 4	2.00
D J ×10^5	6.284	1.580	3.97	6.294	1.580	3.97
D JK ×10^5	−7.928	−1.969	4.03	−7.450	−1.968	3.79
D K ×10^5	7.489	1.890	3.96	7.513	1.896	3.96
H J ×10^9	3.73	0.454	8.21	7.19	0.780	9.22
H JK ×10^9	−5.81	−0.680	8.54	−33.4	−3.72	8.98
H KJ ×10^9	0.92	0.082	11.2	46.0	5.42	8.45
H K ×10^9	5.35	0.414	12.9	−15.0	−2.11	7.11
L J ×10^11	0.0^c	0.0^c		0.0^c	0.0^c
L JJK ×10^11	0.0^c	0.0^c		−1.32	0.0^c
L JK ×10^11	0.0^c	0.0^c		5.02	0.0^c
L KKJ ×10^11	0.0^c	0.0^c		−6.30	0.0^c
L K ×10^11	0.0^c	0.0^c		2.50	0.0^c
ϵ×10^5	1.504 3	0.387 26	3.88	0.0^c	0.0^c
ϵ J ×10^9	−2.442	−0.237	10.3	0.0^c	0.0^c
ϵ K ×10^9	1.819	0.195	9.32	0.0^c	0.0^c
ϵ JJ ×10^13	3.18	0.0^c		0.0^c	0.0^c
h 3×10^9	0.0^c	0.0^c		1.523	0.1513	10.0
h 3J ×10^12	0.0^c	0.0^c		0.405	0.025	16.2
h 3JJ ×10^15	0.0^c	0.0^c		−0.151	0.0^c
Number of data	7090	11 950		7079	11 922
St.dev.of the fit×10^7	7.67	725		7.87	744
^a From [1]. ^b H/D is the ratio between the parameters of ^123SbH3 and ^123SbD3 . ^c Constrained.