Do all obsessions contradict personal values to the same degree? A pilot investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although much is known about how intrusive thoughts become obsessions, the factors that determine which particular thoughts do so is not. The degree to which intrusions are personally significant may be such a determinant. Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is heterogeneous; thus, it is possible that contradictions of personal values may play a varying role in the development of obsessions depending on which OCD symptoms manifest and may change differentially following treatment. Archival data were examined. Patients with a diagnosis of OCD (N = 62) reported their most upsetting obsession and the degree to which it violated values both pre- and postparticipation in group cognitive-behavioral therapy for OCD. At pretreatment, contradiction ratings differed across symptom domains, such that participants with primary symptoms of obsessions/checking exhibited contradiction ratings that were significantly greater than did participants with other primary symptoms. Contradiction ratings did not change posttreatment. Implications for the conceptualization of OCD are discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".