Keyword search (4,163 papers available)

"OCD" Keyword-tagged Publications:

Title Authors PubMed ID
1 Obsessive-compulsive symptoms moderate the effect of contamination motion on disgust intensity Pelzer M; Ouellet-Courtois C; Krause S; Coughtrey A; Fink-Lamotte J; 40858003
CCRH
2 Reappraising beliefs about losing control: An experimental investigation Fridgen CPEA; Radomsky AS; 39837217
PSYCHOLOGY
3 Further analyses of appraisals of losing control and other OCD-related cognitions: A quasi-experimental investigation Sandstrom A; Radomsky AS; 39626976
PSYCHOLOGY
4 Development and psychometric evaluation of the Violation Appraisal Measure (VAM) Krause S; Radomsky AS; 39206950
PSYCHOLOGY
5 'Things that shouldn't be': a qualitative investigation of violation-related appraisals in individuals with OCD and/or trauma histories Krause S; Radomsky AS; 38679952
PSYCHOLOGY
6 What's control got to do with it? A systematic review of control beliefs in obsessive-compulsive disorder Sandstrom A; Krause S; Ouellet-Courtois C; Kelly-Turner K; Radomsky AS; 38091769
PSYCHOLOGY
7 Beliefs about losing control and other OCD-related cognitions: An experimental investigation Sandstrom A; Radomsky AS; 37948951
PSYCHOLOGY
8 The fear of losing control Adam S Radomsky 36113905
PSYCHOLOGY
9 "Was I asking for it?": An experimental investigation of perceived responsibility, mental contamination and workplace sexual harassment. Krause S, Radomsky AS 33321247
PSYCHOLOGY
10 The Covert and Overt Reassurance Seeking Inventory (CORSI): Development, validation and psychometric analyses. Radomsky AS, Neal RL, Parrish CL, Lavoie SL, Schell SE 33046164
CONCORDIA
11 Hoping for more: How cognitive science has and hasn't been helpful to the OCD clinician. Ouimet AJ, Ashbaugh AR, Radomsky AS 29673581
PSYCHOLOGY
12 Beliefs about losing control, obsessions, and caution: An experimental investigation. Gagné JP, Radomsky AS 32045733
PSYCHOLOGY
13 What do you really need? Self- and partner-reported intervention preferences within cognitive behavioural therapy for reassurance seeking behaviour. Neal RL, Radomsky AS 31495351
PSYCHOLOGY

 

Title:What do you really need? Self- and partner-reported intervention preferences within cognitive behavioural therapy for reassurance seeking behaviour.
Authors:Neal RLRadomsky AS
Link:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31495351?dopt=Abstract
DOI:10.1017/S135246581900050X
Publication:Behavioural and cognitive psychotherapy
Keywords:acceptabilitycognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)intervention preferenceobsessive compulsive disorder (OCD)partnersreassurance seeking
PMID:31495351 Category:Behav Cogn Psychother Date Added:2019-09-10
Dept Affiliation: PSYCHOLOGY
1 Department of Psychology, Concordia University, Montréal, Canada.

Description:

What do you really need? Self- and partner-reported intervention preferences within cognitive behavioural therapy for reassurance seeking behaviour.

Behav Cogn Psychother. 2019 Sep 09;:1-13

Authors: Neal RL, Radomsky AS

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reassurance seeking (RS) in obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) is commonly addressed in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) using a technique called reducing accommodation. Reducing accommodation is a behaviourally based CBT intervention that may be effective; however, there is a lack of controlled research on its use and acceptability to clients/patients, and case studies suggest that it can be associated with negative emotional/behavioural consequences. Providing support to encourage coping with distress is a cognitively based CBT intervention that may be an effective alternative, but lacks evidence regarding its acceptability.

AIMS: This study aimed to determine whether support provision may be a more acceptable/endorsed CBT intervention for RS than a strict reducing accommodation approach.

METHOD: Participants and familiar partners (N = 179) read vignette descriptions of accommodation reduction and support interventions, and responded to measures of perceived intervention acceptability/adhereability and endorsement, before completing a forced-choice preference task.

RESULTS: Overall, findings suggested that participants and partners gave significantly higher ratings for the support than the accommodation reduction intervention (partial ?2 = .049 to .321). Participants and partners also both selected the support intervention more often than the traditional reducing accommodation intervention when given the choice.

CONCLUSIONS: Support provision is perceived as an acceptable CBT intervention for RS by participants and their familiar partners. These results have implications for cognitive behavioural theory and practice related to RS.

PMID: 31495351 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]





BookR developed by Sriram Narayanan
for the Concordia University School of Health
Copyright © 2011-2026
Cookie settings
Concordia University