MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192898785 · doi:10.1002/cpp.2656

The relationship between obsessions and the self: Feared and actual self‐descriptions in a clinical obsessive–compulsive disorder sample

2021· article· en· W3192898785 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

VenueClinical Psychology & Psychotherapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEuropean CommissionEuropean Regional Development FundMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsPsychologyObsessive compulsiveAssociation (psychology)IntrusionSelfCognitionAnxietyContent (measure theory)Clinical psychologySocial psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive models of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) posit the relevance of the self in OCD, although the nature of this association is still unclear. We aimed to explore actual and feared selves and its association with obsessions and intrusions in a group of OCD patients. A group of 58 patients with OCD identified their most upsetting obsession and intrusion (non-clinical obsession) experienced in the past 3 months. These cognitions were classified as either moral-based or autogenous (obsessions n = 32; intrusions n = 26) or non-moral-based or reactive, depending on their content. Next, patients described their actual self and their feared self, that is, the person they feared being or becoming, and whether they believed these descriptions were associated with their obsessions/intrusions. Results indicate that individuals with OCD described themselves as insecure, anxious and fearful, but also as good and nice. They particularly feared a selfish, aggressive, bad, liar, coward, insecure and arrogant self. Two-thirds of the patients believed that their obsessions said something about their actual self (65.52%) and that their obsessions brought them closer to the person they do not want to be (62.06%). A third of patients believed their intrusions said something about their actual self (actual self: 30.35%; feared self: 25%), which was a significantly lower percentage than for obsessions. These associations existed independent from the content of the obsession and/or intrusion, although patients with obsessions with moral-based contents more often tended to believe that their obsessions brought them closer to the person they do not want to be. Results suggest the relevance of the real and feared selves in the maintenance of obsessions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.353 · 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