MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cognitive Approaches to Understanding Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders

2023· book-chapter· en· W4385938033 on OpenAlexaff
Steven Taylor, Jonathan S. Abramowitz, Dean McKay, Charlene Minaya

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDysfunctional familyBody dysmorphic disorderCognitionPsychologyPerspective (graphical)Hoarding disorderObsessive compulsiveHoarding (animal behavior)Clinical psychologyPsychotherapistCognitive psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter focuses on cognitive models (also known as cognitive-behavioral models) of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and related disorders. The models posit that appraisals, dysfunctional beliefs, and maladaptive behaviors play important roles in the etiology and maintenance of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (OCRDs). The chapter begins with an historical perspective in which the antecedents of the models are described. Contemporary cognitive models of OCD are described, and their empirical support is reviewed. This is followed by a review of cognitive models of four OCRDs: hoarding disorder, skin-picking disorder (excoriation), body dysmorphic disorder, and hair-pulling disorder (trichotillomania). Conceptual strengths and weaknesses of OCD and OCD-related cognitive models are identified, areas for improvement are identified, and potentially fruitful directions for future research are proposed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207