Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34840417›Full record

ArticleJournal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment2022

Risking Everything in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: An Analogue Decision-Making Study.

James Croft, Jessica R Grisham, Andrew Perfors, Brett K Hayes

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James CroftSchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Mathews Building, Kensington, Sydney, NSW 2052 Australia.
Jessica R GrishamSchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Mathews Building, Kensington, Sydney, NSW 2052 Australia.
Andrew PerforsSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Brett K HayesSchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Mathews Building, Kensington, Sydney, NSW 2052 Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An experiment examined decision-making processes among nonclinical participants with low or high levels of OCD symptomatology (N = 303). To better simulate the decision environments that are most likely to be problematic for clients with OCD, we employed decision tasks that incorporated "black swan" options that have a very low probability but involve substantial loss. When faced with a choice between a safer option that involved no risk of loss or a riskier alternative with a very low probability of substantial loss, most participants chose the safer option regardless of OCD symptom level. However, when faced with choices between options that had similar expected values to the previous choices, but where each option had some low risk of a substantial loss, there was a significant shift towards riskier decisions. These effects were stronger when the task involved a contamination based, health-relevant decision task as compared to one with financial outcomes. The results suggest that both low and high symptom OC participants approach decisions involving risk-free options and decisions involving risky alternatives in qualitatively different ways. There was some evidence that measures of impulsivity were better predictors of the shift to risky decision making than OCD symptomatology.

Indexed as

Black swanDecision-makingImpulsivityObsessive–compulsive disorderRisk-taking

Identifiers

PMID34840417
PMCPMC8606630
OpenAlexW3217490810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.