对潜在伤害的责任感是否会减轻重复检查对元记忆和自动化的影响?

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-06-27 DOI:10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.101977
Karina Wahl, Martin Kollárik, Roselind Lieb
{"title":"对潜在伤害的责任感是否会减轻重复检查对元记忆和自动化的影响?","authors":"Karina Wahl,&nbsp;Martin Kollárik,&nbsp;Roselind Lieb","doi":"10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.101977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objectives</h3><p>Repeated checking results in large reductions in metamemory variables (confidence, details, and vividness). It has been suggested that the underlying mechanism is gradual automatization. At the same time, individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are reluctant to automatize routine processes. The aim was to investigate whether high responsibility for potential harm, typical of OCD, would attenuate the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables and automatization.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>One hundred seventy-five participants were initially provided with a cover story that put the subsequent virtual checking task in a context of potential harm for not checking properly. Participants were randomly allocated to four experimental groups (varying high and low responsibility, relevant and irrelevant checking) and performed a virtual checking task repeatedly, using either identical stimuli (relevant checking) or different stimuli (irrelevant checking) between the first and final checking trial. Metamemory variables were rated on visual analogue scales, and response latencies were assessed to establish automatization.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Larger reductions in metamemory variables following relevant checking compared to irrelevant checking replicated previous findings. High responsibility did not affect these results. Large reductions in response latencies across the checking trials (automatization) were also independent of the perceived responsibility.</p></div><div><h3>Limitations</h3><p>We did not include individuals with OCD.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Since responsibility did not influence the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables, findings are consistent with the idea that automatization remains a plausible explanation of the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables in individuals with OCD.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48198,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 101977"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791624000363/pdfft?md5=711ac15b1a6d45ee8e495416c59496a8&pid=1-s2.0-S0005791624000363-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does responsibility for potential harm attenuate the effects of repeated checking on metamemory and automatization?\",\"authors\":\"Karina Wahl,&nbsp;Martin Kollárik,&nbsp;Roselind Lieb\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.101977\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and objectives</h3><p>Repeated checking results in large reductions in metamemory variables (confidence, details, and vividness). It has been suggested that the underlying mechanism is gradual automatization. At the same time, individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are reluctant to automatize routine processes. The aim was to investigate whether high responsibility for potential harm, typical of OCD, would attenuate the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables and automatization.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>One hundred seventy-five participants were initially provided with a cover story that put the subsequent virtual checking task in a context of potential harm for not checking properly. Participants were randomly allocated to four experimental groups (varying high and low responsibility, relevant and irrelevant checking) and performed a virtual checking task repeatedly, using either identical stimuli (relevant checking) or different stimuli (irrelevant checking) between the first and final checking trial. Metamemory variables were rated on visual analogue scales, and response latencies were assessed to establish automatization.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Larger reductions in metamemory variables following relevant checking compared to irrelevant checking replicated previous findings. High responsibility did not affect these results. Large reductions in response latencies across the checking trials (automatization) were also independent of the perceived responsibility.</p></div><div><h3>Limitations</h3><p>We did not include individuals with OCD.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Since responsibility did not influence the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables, findings are consistent with the idea that automatization remains a plausible explanation of the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables in individuals with OCD.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48198,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"85 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101977\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791624000363/pdfft?md5=711ac15b1a6d45ee8e495416c59496a8&pid=1-s2.0-S0005791624000363-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791624000363\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791624000363","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:重复检查会导致元记忆变量(信心、细节和生动性)的大量减少。有人认为其根本机制是逐渐自动化。与此同时,患有强迫症(OCD)的人却不愿意将常规过程自动化。本研究旨在探讨强迫症患者对潜在伤害的高度责任感是否会减弱重复检查对元记忆变量和自动化的影响:175 名参与者最初会收到一个封面故事,将随后的虚拟检查任务置于不正确检查可能造成伤害的背景下。参与者被随机分配到四个实验组(责任感高低、相关检查和不相关检查各不相同),并在第一次和最后一次检查试验之间使用相同的刺激(相关检查)或不同的刺激(不相关检查)重复执行虚拟检查任务。元记忆变量采用视觉模拟量表进行评分,并对反应潜伏期进行评估,以确定自动化程度:结果:与无关检查相比,相关检查后元记忆变量的减少幅度更大,这与之前的研究结果一致。高度的责任感并没有影响这些结果。检查试验中反应潜伏期的大幅缩短(自动化)也与感知到的责任无关:局限性:我们没有将强迫症患者包括在内:由于责任感并不影响重复检查对元记忆变量的影响,因此研究结果与以下观点一致,即自动化仍然是强迫症患者重复检查对元记忆变量影响的一个合理解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Does responsibility for potential harm attenuate the effects of repeated checking on metamemory and automatization?

Background and objectives

Repeated checking results in large reductions in metamemory variables (confidence, details, and vividness). It has been suggested that the underlying mechanism is gradual automatization. At the same time, individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are reluctant to automatize routine processes. The aim was to investigate whether high responsibility for potential harm, typical of OCD, would attenuate the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables and automatization.

Methods

One hundred seventy-five participants were initially provided with a cover story that put the subsequent virtual checking task in a context of potential harm for not checking properly. Participants were randomly allocated to four experimental groups (varying high and low responsibility, relevant and irrelevant checking) and performed a virtual checking task repeatedly, using either identical stimuli (relevant checking) or different stimuli (irrelevant checking) between the first and final checking trial. Metamemory variables were rated on visual analogue scales, and response latencies were assessed to establish automatization.

Results

Larger reductions in metamemory variables following relevant checking compared to irrelevant checking replicated previous findings. High responsibility did not affect these results. Large reductions in response latencies across the checking trials (automatization) were also independent of the perceived responsibility.

Limitations

We did not include individuals with OCD.

Conclusions

Since responsibility did not influence the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables, findings are consistent with the idea that automatization remains a plausible explanation of the effects of repeated checking on metamemory variables in individuals with OCD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: The publication of the book Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition (1958) by the co-founding editor of this Journal, Joseph Wolpe, marked a major change in the understanding and treatment of mental disorders. The book used principles from empirical behavioral science to explain psychopathological phenomena and the resulting explanations were critically tested and used to derive effective treatments. The second half of the 20th century saw this rigorous scientific approach come to fruition. Experimental approaches to psychopathology, in particular those used to test conditioning theories and cognitive theories, have steadily expanded, and experimental analysis of processes characterising and maintaining mental disorders have become an established research area.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Predictors of polyregulation and its effectiveness following exposure to One's most personally distressing intrusive thought Further analyses of appraisals of losing control and other OCD-related cognitions: A quasi-experimental investigation Ecological momentary assessment models trajectories of expectancy following exposure: A proof-of-concept pilot study Joint attention effect on irrelevant stimuli resistance in high functional autism and neurotypical adults
×
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