MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132457564 · doi:10.1017/s1352465813000957

Imagery in Mental Contamination

2014· article· en· W2132457564 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Coughtrey, Roz Shafran, S. Rachman

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Reading
KeywordsPsychologyContaminationMental imageCognitionPsychiatryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intrusive imagery is experienced in a number of anxiety disorders, including Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD). Imagery is particularly relevant to mental contamination, where unwanted intrusive images are hypothesized to evoke feelings of dirtiness and urges to wash (Rachman, 2006). AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine the nature of imagery associated with mental contamination. METHOD: Fifteen people with contaminated-based OCD completed a semi-structured imagery interview designed specifically for this study. RESULTS: Ten participants reported images associated with contamination. These images were vivid and distressing and evoked feelings of dirtiness. Participants engaged in a number of behaviours to neutralize their images, including compulsive washing. A small number of participants also reported images that protected them from contamination. CONCLUSIONS: In support of the theory of mental contamination (Rachman, 2006), images can lead to feelings of pollution and compulsive washing. Further research is needed to explore the role of imagery in maintaining contamination fears.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioural and Cognitive PsychotherapySame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207