Contamination fear in OCD: the relation between guilt and disgust sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction:Research has demonstrated the role of disgust \nsensitivity in contamination-related OCD, particularly in patients \nwho are not afraid of specific threatening consequences which \nmight follow becoming contaminated. The relation between the \nfear of guilt and obsessive-compulsive symptoms has also been \nsupported: many patients are afraid of being responsible for \nharming themselves or someone else because of their own \ncarelessness or negligence. It remains unclear whether these two \npathways that lead to the genesis of OCD are independent or not. \nOur hypothesis is that disgust sensitivity is strongly related to guilt \nand that the preservation of a self-image of moral integrity may \nbe underlying all forms of OCD. When OCD sufferers do have \nexperiences that threaten this self-image, even if only imaginative, \nthey feel extremely guilty, mentally contaminated and disgusted \nby themselves. The sense of moral dirt manifests itself with an \nincrease in disgust sensitivity that triggers the onset of a \nconsequent contamination fear. \nMethod:More than 450 non-clinical subjects were asked to \ncomplete a battery of self-report questionnaires (Guilt Inventory, \nDisgust Scale Revised, Contamination subscale of Vancouver \nObsessive-Compulsive Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory-II). \nStructural equation modelling assessed the relationships among \ndisgust sensitivity, guilt and contamination fears, controlling for \ndepression. \nresults:Even if preliminary results are still not available, we \nexpect that guilt (moral dirt), disgust sensitivity and contamination \nfear will be strongly related, even when controlling for depressive \nsymptoms. Otherwise, we expect that the model will support our \nhypothesis that disgust sensitivity has a mediating role between \nguilt, loss of a self-image of moral integrity and contamination \nfear. \nDiscussion and Conclusion: The findings will be discussed in \ncomparison to previous studies about the role of guilt and disgust \nsensitivity in contamination-related OCD and its implications in \nclinical setting.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".