This article reports on the development of a revised version of the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory (OCI; E. B. Foa, M. J. Kozak, P. Salkovskis, M. E. Coles, & N. Amir, 1998), a psychometrically sound, theoretically driven, self-report measure. The revised OCI (OCI-R) improves on the parent version in 3 ways: It eliminates the redundant frequency scale, simplifies the scoring of the subscales, and reduces overlap across subscales. The reliability and validity of the OCI-R were examined in 215 patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), 243 patients with other anxiety disorders, and 677 nonanxious individuals. The OCI-R, which contains 18 items and 6 subscales, has retained excellent psychometric properties. The OCI-R and its subscales differentiated well between individuals with and without OCD. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses demonstrated the usefulness of the OCI-R as a diagnostic tool for screening patients with OCD, utilizing empirically derived cutscores.
Clomipramine, exposure and ritual prevention, and their combination are all efficacious treatments for OCD. Intensive exposure and ritual prevention may be superior to clomipramine and, by implication, to monotherapy with the other SRIs.
The use of unreliable measures constitutes a threat to our understanding of psychopathology, because advancement of science using both behavioral and biologically-oriented measures can only be certain if such measurements are reliable. Two pillars of NIMH’s portfolio – the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative for psychopathology and the target engagement initiative in clinical trials – cannot succeed without measures that possess the high reliability necessary for tests involving mediation and selection based on individual differences. We focus on the historical lack of reliability of attentional bias measures as an illustration of how reliability can pose a threat to our understanding. Our own data replicate previous findings of poor reliability for traditionally-used scores, which suggests a serious problem with the ability to test theories regarding attentional bias. This lack of reliability may also suggest problems with the assumption (in both theory and the formula for the scores) that attentional bias is consistent and stable across time. In contrast, measures accounting for attention as a dynamic process in time show good reliability in our data. The field is sorely in need of research reporting findings and reliability for attentional bias scores using multiple methods, including those focusing on dynamic processes over time. We urge researchers to test and report reliability of all measures, considering findings of low reliability not just as a nuisance but as an opportunity to modify and improve upon the underlying theory. Full assessment of reliability of measures will maximize the possibility that RDoC (and psychological science more generally) will succeed.
All active treatments were superior to PBO on primary outcomes. Combined treatment did not yield any further advantage. Notwithstanding the benefits of treatment, many patients remained symptomatic after 14 weeks.
Research on deficits in emotion regulation has devoted considerable attention to emotion-regulation strategies. We propose that deficits in emotion regulation may also be related to emotion-regulation goals. We tested this possibility by assessing the direction in which depressed people chose to regulate their emotions (i.e., toward happiness, toward sadness). In three studies, clinically depressed participants were more likely than nondepressed participants to use emotion-regulation strategies in a direction that was likely to maintain or increase their level of sadness. This pattern was found when using the regulation strategies of situation selection (Studies 1 and 2) and cognitive reappraisal (Study 3). The findings demonstrate that maladaptive emotion regulation may be linked not only to the means people use to regulate their emotions, but also to the ends toward which those means are directed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.