Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.605792
Title: An investigation into the cognitive predictors of obsessive-compulsive symptoms
Author: Gwilliam, Petra Deanna
Awarding Body: University of Manchester
Current Institution: University of Manchester
Date of Award: 2001
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Abstract:
A number of theoretical perspectives have been taken in the development of cognitive models of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Three cognitive models dominate the current literature. These models focus upon: inflated responsibility (Salkovskis, 1985); thought-action fusion (Rachman, 1993); and meta-cognitive beliefs (Wells and Matthews, 1994; Wells, 2000). The aims of this study were to develop a measure of meta-cognition for obsessive compulsive symptoms (the Thought-Fusion Instrument) based on the Wells (2000) domains of meta-cognition, and to establish its preliminary psychometric properties. The research also aimed at examining the association between cognitive factors and obsessive-compulsive symptoms, as a means of evaluating the cognitive models of OCD. In particular, the ability of inflated responsibility and meta-cognitions to predict obsessive-compulsive symptoms was tested. It was hypothesised that responsibility and specific meta-cognitive beliefs would be positively correlated with obsessive-compulsive symptoms. It was also hypothesised that the relationship between responsibility and obsessivecompulsive symptoms would be statistically dependent on meta-cognition. Furthermore, meta-cognitions would correlate with obsessive-compulsive symptoms independently of responsibility. The results demonstrated adequate reliability and validity for the Thought-Fusion Instrument (TFI). All of the hypotheses were supported. The results showed that both responsibility and meta-cognitions were positively associated with obsessive compulsive symptoms. Meta-cognitions emerged as independent predictors of such symptoms whereas responsibility did not. These findings and their clinical implications are discussed in the context of the three theoretical models described. The limitations of the present research are outlined, along with suggestions for future studies.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.605792  DOI: Not available
Share: