An investigation of the experience of control through the sense of agency in people with obsessive-compulsive disorder: a review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY CNS Spectrums Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-25 DOI:10.1017/S1092852924000117
Davide Fausto Borrelli, Matteo Tonna, Reuven Dar
{"title":"An investigation of the experience of control through the sense of agency in people with obsessive-compulsive disorder: a review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Davide Fausto Borrelli, Matteo Tonna, Reuven Dar","doi":"10.1017/S1092852924000117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The construct of sense of agency (SoA) has proven useful for understanding mechanisms underlying obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) phenomenology, especially in explaining the apparent dissociation in OCD between actual and perceived control over one's actions. Paradoxically, people with OCD appear to experience both diminished SoA (feeling unable to control their actions) and inflated SoA (having \"magical\" control over events). The present review investigated the extent to which the SoA is distorted in OCD, in terms of both implicit (ie, inferred from correlates and outcomes of voluntary actions) and explicit (ie, subjective judgment of one's control over an outcome) measures of SoA. Our search resulted in 15 studies that met the criteria for inclusion in a meta-analysis, where we also examined the potential moderating effects of the type of measure (explicit versus implicit) and of the actual control participants had over the outcome. We found that participants with OCD or with high levels of OCD symptoms show lower implicit measures of SoA and at the same time tend to overestimate their control in situations where they do not actually have it. Together, these findings support the hypothesized dissociation in OCD between actual and perceived control over one's actions.</p>","PeriodicalId":10505,"journal":{"name":"CNS Spectrums","volume":" ","pages":"224-232"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CNS Spectrums","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1092852924000117","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The construct of sense of agency (SoA) has proven useful for understanding mechanisms underlying obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) phenomenology, especially in explaining the apparent dissociation in OCD between actual and perceived control over one's actions. Paradoxically, people with OCD appear to experience both diminished SoA (feeling unable to control their actions) and inflated SoA (having "magical" control over events). The present review investigated the extent to which the SoA is distorted in OCD, in terms of both implicit (ie, inferred from correlates and outcomes of voluntary actions) and explicit (ie, subjective judgment of one's control over an outcome) measures of SoA. Our search resulted in 15 studies that met the criteria for inclusion in a meta-analysis, where we also examined the potential moderating effects of the type of measure (explicit versus implicit) and of the actual control participants had over the outcome. We found that participants with OCD or with high levels of OCD symptoms show lower implicit measures of SoA and at the same time tend to overestimate their control in situations where they do not actually have it. Together, these findings support the hypothesized dissociation in OCD between actual and perceived control over one's actions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
强迫症患者通过代理感获得控制体验的调查:回顾与元分析
事实证明,代入感(SoA)这一概念有助于理解强迫症(OCD)现象的内在机制,尤其是在解释强迫症患者对自己行为的实际控制与感知控制之间的明显分离方面。自相矛盾的是,强迫症患者似乎既经历过控制感减弱(感觉无法控制自己的行为),又经历过控制感增强(对事件有 "神奇 "的控制力)。本综述从内隐(即从自愿行为的相关因素和结果推断)和外显(即对自己控制结果的主观判断)SoA 测量两个方面,研究了强迫症患者的 SoA 被扭曲的程度。我们的搜索结果有 15 项研究符合纳入荟萃分析的标准,其中我们还考察了测量类型(显性与隐性)和参与者对结果的实际控制力的潜在调节作用。我们发现,患有强迫症或强迫症症状程度较高的参与者显示出较低的内隐 SoA 测量值,同时,在他们实际上没有控制权的情况下,他们倾向于高估自己的控制权。这些发现共同支持了强迫症患者对自己行为的实际控制和感知控制之间的分离假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CNS Spectrums
CNS Spectrums 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
6.10%
发文量
239
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CNS Spectrums covers all aspects of the clinical neurosciences, neurotherapeutics, and neuropsychopharmacology, particularly those pertinent to the clinician and clinical investigator. The journal features focused, in-depth reviews, perspectives, and original research articles. New therapeutics of all types in psychiatry, mental health, and neurology are emphasized, especially first in man studies, proof of concept studies, and translational basic neuroscience studies. Subject coverage spans the full spectrum of neuropsychiatry, focusing on those crossing traditional boundaries between neurology and psychiatry.
期刊最新文献
Esketamine nasal spray versus quetiapine XR in adults with treatment-resistant depression: a secondary analysis of the ESCAPE-TRD randomized clinical trial. Rethinking Psychometric Testing in Autism: Overcoming the Challenges of Comorbidity and Diagnostic Overshadowing. The Italian general psychiatry and forensic psychiatry treatment model: a unique story. Are glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists anti-consummatory drugs? What role did serious mental illness play in Jackson Pollock's drip paintings? Abstract expressionism and possible links to serious mental illness and encrypted images (polloglyphs).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1