MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100247831 · doi:10.1002/jclp.20578

Intrusions related to obsessive‐compulsive disorder: a question of content or context?

2009· article· en· W2100247831 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversité de MontréalInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalOttawa Fertility Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyContext (archaeology)Obsessive compulsiveContent (measure theory)CognitionClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the current study was to investigate whether intrusions of individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and nonclinical individuals differed in content and in context of occurrence. The results suggest that although the intrusions of OCD and nonclinical individuals are similar in content, they differ in their context of occurrence. Chi square analyses revealed that the intrusions of nonclinical participants were more likely to be directly linked than indirectly linked to observations in the here and now, whereas the intrusions of participants with OCD were more prone to be indirectly linked than directly linked to triggers in the environment at the time they occurred. The implications of the results for cognitive models of OCD are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.381 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it