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

Imagery in Mental Contamination

2014· article· en· W2132457564 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

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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