MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171744939

An investigation of excessive reassurance seeking in OCD

2009· dissertation· en· W2171744939 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2009
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsPsychologyAnxietyDistressSadnessCognitionDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyInterpersonal communicationDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryAnger
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Excessive reassurance-seeking (ERS) is a common problem among individuals dealing with emotional and/or psychological difficulties. Prior research on ERS has focused almost exclusively on the potential consequences of this behaviour in the contexts of Depression and Hypochondriasis, and this research has shown that ERS contributes to interpersonal difficulties and emotional distress. Despite anecdotal evidence that ERS is a hallmark feature of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), comparatively few studies have examined OCD-related ERS. The goal of the present research was to examine various cognitive, behavioural and affective processes that may be involved in the perpetuation of ERS, specifically within the contexts of OCD and Depression. Given the purported functional equivalence between OCD-related reassurance seeking and compulsive checking (Rachman, 2002), the current investigations also aimed to compare ERS and repeated checking activity across a number of important domains (i.e., content, precipitating factors, function and termination criteria). Toward these goals, Study I employed a semi-structured interview with clinical (OCD and Depression) and non-clinical individuals to examine factors involved in the onset, maintenance and termination of ERS and repeated checking. Results revealed that individuals with OCD tend to seek reassurance about perceived general threats (e.g., fire, theft), whereas ERS tends to be focused on perceived social threats (e.g., abandonment, loss of support) among depressed individuals. Clinical participants reported greater anxiety, sadness and perceived threat in association with ERS and repeated checking than healthy control participants. Study 2 examined how manipulations of threat, responsibility, and ambiguity of feedback impacted upon non-clinical participants' anxiety and compulsive urges (to seek reassurance and to check) in a series of experimental vignettes. Consistent with hypotheses, higher levels of perceived threat, responsibility and ambiguity of feedback were associated with greater anxiety and compulsive urges. Results also suggested that perceived threat and responsibility partially mediated the effects of ambiguity of feedback on anxiety, urges to check, and (for threat) urges to seek reassurance. The collective results of these studies are discussed in terms of cognitive and behavioural models of OCD, and directions for future research are suggested.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · 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