Search

In the context of clinical anxiety, safety behaviors are actions performed to prevent, escape, or minimize feared catastrophes and/or associated distress. Research consistently implicates safety behaviors in the development and maintenance of anxiety disorders; accordingly, safety behaviors are traditionally eliminated during exposure treatments for pathological anxiety. The notion that safety behaviors are ubiquitously deleterious in the context of exposure has recently been challenged, yet findings regarding safety behaviors' effects on exposure outcomes are limited, mixed, and controversial. Furthermore, developments in explanatory models for exposure's effectiveness (e.g., inhibitory learning theory) highlight other possible consequences of safety behaviors performed during exposure. Unfortunately, these theoretical advances are neglected in experimental research. The present review critically examines the literature addressing the role of safety behaviors in exposure therapy from an inhibitory learning perspective. Limitations, future directions, and clinical recommendations are also discussed.

Analogue samples are often used to study obsessive–compulsive (OC) symptoms and related phenomena. This approach is based on the hypothesis that results derived from such samples are relevant to understanding OC symptoms in individuals with a diagnosis of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). Two decades ago, Gibbs (1996) reviewed the available literature and found initial support for this hypothesis. Since then there have been many important advances addressing this issue. The purpose of the present review was to synthesize various lines of research examining the assumptions of using analogue samples to draw inferences about people with OCD. We reviewed research on the prevalence of OC symptoms in non-clinical populations, the dimensional (vs. categorical) nature of these symptoms, phenomenology, etiology, and studies on developmental and maintenance factors in clinical and analogue samples. We also considered the relevance of analogue samples in OCD treatment research. The available evidence suggests research with analogue samples is highly relevant for understanding OC symptoms. Guidelines for the appropriate use of analogue designs and samples are suggested.

article i nfo A vast and heterogeneous body of literature on the neuropsychology of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) has accumulated in recent decades, yielding inconsistent results. In an attempt to quantitatively summarize the literature, we conducted a meta-analysis of 115 studies (including 3452 patients), comparing adult OCD pa- tients with healthycontrols on testsof10neuropsychologicaldomains.Acrossstudies, medium meaneffectsizes were found for all executive function subdomains, processing speed, and sustained attention. Small effect sizes were found for visuospatial abilities and working memory. A large effect size was found for non-verbal memory whereas a smalleffect size was foundfor verbalmemory, whereonly theformer was found to be associated with impairments in executive functions. Moderators of effect sizes were also investigated. Results are discussed in terms of their clinical significance as well as their implications for current neurobiological models of OCD and methodological caveats.

The majority of treatment research on OCD has focused on pre/post treatment efficacy of exposure-based interventions, with less attention directed towards (a) understanding mechanisms of change, and (b) maximizing long-term effectiveness. Inhibitory learning theory (ILT) provides a novel foundation for understanding how exposure therapy reduces fear. Moreover, ILT is consistent with empirical evidence that raises questions about the more traditional (i.e., habituation) explanation for exposure therapy's efficacy. Yet ILT has yet to be applied to understanding the treatment of OCD and its heterogeneity. The current review is an examination of human experimental research on ILT that seeks to translate laboratory findings on fear extinction to exposure therapy across empirically established OCD symptom dimensions. We provide an up-to-date critical review of the existing evidence for a series of strategies derived from ILT that have been proposed for the treatment of fear, discuss the limitations of existing studies, and provide suggestions for future research within this rapidly accelerating area of study. We also offer conceptual considerations for applying these principles to the treatment of OCD symptom dimensions. A common theme is the idea of introducing "desirable difficulties" into the implementation of exposure in order to foster more durable long-term learning.

Recently, experts have suggested that obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), a highly heterogeneous condition, is actually composed of distinct subtypes. Research to identify specific subtypes of OCD has focused primarily on symptom presentation. Subtype models have been proposed using factor analyses that yield dimensional systems of symptom categories, but not necessarily distinct subtypes. Other empirical work has considered the role of neuropsychological functioning and comorbidity as part of a comprehensive scheme for subtyping OCD. The identified dimensions from all of these studies have implications for the treatment of OCD. In this article, we review the research on subtypes of OCD, focusing on subtype schemes based upon overt symptom presentation and neuropsychological profiles. We also review research pertinent to alternative subtyping schemes, both conceptually and methodologically. The research is critically examined and implications for treatment are discussed. Recommendations for future investigations are offered.

Research has shown that attempts to suppress a thought can cause an increase in the frequency of the thought. These paradoxical effects of thought suppression play a key role in cognitive-behavioral models of several emotional disorders. Laboratory studies of this phenomenon, however, have yielded mixed results; and narrative summaries of the literature have not been able to draw firm conclusions about the effects of thought suppression. We used meta-analysis to quantitatively examine the magnitude of thought suppression effects across controlled studies. Moreover, we explored whether the variability in effect sizes could be explained by methodological differences within and between studies. Results indicated a small to moderate rebound effect of thought suppression that varied in magnitude depending on the nature of the target thought and the method by which thought frequency was measured. Participants with clinical diagnoses did not show larger rebound effects than nonclinical or analogue participants, however, only a few studies included clinical samples. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for the ironic process theory of thought suppression, and avenues for future research on this phenomenon.