Bouvard M, Robbe-Grillet P, Milliery M, Pham S, Amireche S, Fanget F, Guerin J, Cottraux J
UTA, Hôpital Neurologique, 59, boulevard Pinel, 69394 Lyon.
Encephale. 2001 May-Jun;27(3):229-37.
Appraisal of inflated responsibility for harm is the cornerstone of Salkovskis's cognitive theory for obsessive compulsive disorder. The aim of our study is to present the validation study of the French translation of the R scale. The present study compared 50 subjects with obsessive compulsive disorder, 37 patients suffering from social phobia and 183 control subjects on a responsibility questionnaire (R scale). The cognitive hypothesis of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) specifies two levels of responsibility-related cognitions: responsibility assumptions (attitudes) and responsibility appraisals (interpretations). The R scale evaluates the responsibility assumptions. Such attitudes should reflect the more generalized tendency to assume responsibility in a given situation, particularly situations involving intrusions and doubts. It is possible that such assumptions may be less specific to OCD. The inclusion of social phobia subjects in the present study allows evaluation of the specificity of any findings to OCD. Patients were diagnosed and classified according DSM IV criteria. The control subjects were taken in the general population. No formal interview was conducted. The three groups were compared for sex, age and educational level. Before treatment, all the participants filled in the Responsibility Scale of Salkovskis (27 items), the Beck Depression Inventory (21 items), the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the Bouvard's Obsessive Compulsive Thoughts Checklist. The results indicate that the two anxious groups scored significantly higher than the control group on Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories but no significant difference was observed between the two anxious groups. OCD patients scored significantly higher than both social phobic patients and control subjects on the Obsessive Compulsive Thoughts Checklist (OCTC). The social phobic group scored this checklist significantly higher than the control group. In sum, the three groups were different on obsessive compulsive thoughts. On the washing subscale of the Obsessive Compulsive Thoughts Checklist, the OCD patients differed significantly from the control group and the social phobia patients. No difference was observed between the social phobia subjects and the control group. On the two other subscales of the OCTC, the checking and the responsibility scales, the three groups were different: OCD patients scored significantly higher than both social phobic patients and control subjects; the social phobic patients scored higher than the control group. Results support the reliability (test retest) and the internal consistency of the questionnaire. Patients with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) and social phobia subjects had significantly elevated score on the total scale compared to control subjects. However social phobia patients did not differ from patients with OCD. So, the responsibility for harm, evaluated by the R-scale seems not to be specific of OCD. This finding does not support the results of two studies (28, 30). But these two studies compared OCD patients with an anxious group including panic disorder with agoraphobia, generalized anxiety disorder and social phobia. The correlations with a measure of OCD symptoms were higher than the correlations with anxiety and depression. Finally, the factor structure was only studied on the control group. The exploratory factor analysis indicates that the R scale is a two-dimensional scale, reflecting a need to prevent risks and the belief that one has power to harm. The first dimension is less specific to the pathology than the second. Only patients with OCD had significantly elevated score on the "need to prevent risks" compared to the non-clinical group. The two anxious groups differed on "the belief that one has power to harm" from the non-clinical group but social phobia patients did not differ from patients with OCD. In sum, the two subscales of the R scale did not discriminate OCD patients and social phobic subjects. Further research is needed to replicate the present findings and to confirm the two dimensions of the R scale. Overall, the results are consistent with the hypothesis that responsibility beliefs are important in the experience of obsessional problems. However, responsibility assumptions such as the belief that one has the power to harm are shared with social phobia.
对伤害责任的夸大评估是萨尔科夫斯基强迫症认知理论的基石。我们研究的目的是展示R量表法语翻译的验证研究。本研究在一份责任问卷(R量表)上对50名强迫症患者、37名社交恐惧症患者和183名对照受试者进行了比较。强迫症(OCD)的认知假设明确了与责任相关的认知的两个层面:责任假定(态度)和责任评估(解释)。R量表评估责任假定。此类态度应反映在特定情境中,尤其是涉及侵扰和疑虑的情境中承担责任的更普遍倾向。此类假定可能对强迫症的特异性较低。本研究纳入社交恐惧症受试者,以便评估任何研究结果对强迫症的特异性。患者根据《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版标准进行诊断和分类。对照受试者来自普通人群。未进行正式访谈。对三组受试者的性别、年龄和教育水平进行了比较。在治疗前,所有参与者填写了萨尔科夫斯基责任量表(27项)、贝克抑郁量表(21项)、贝克焦虑量表和布瓦尔强迫症思维检查表。结果表明,在贝克抑郁量表和焦虑量表上,两个焦虑组的得分显著高于对照组,但两个焦虑组之间未观察到显著差异。在强迫症思维检查表(OCTC)上,强迫症患者的得分显著高于社交恐惧症患者和对照受试者。社交恐惧症组在该检查表上的得分显著高于对照组。总之,三组在强迫观念上存在差异。在强迫症思维检查表的洗涤子量表上,强迫症患者与对照组和社交恐惧症患者存在显著差异。社交恐惧症受试者与对照组之间未观察到差异。在OCTC的另外两个子量表,即检查和责任量表上,三组存在差异:强迫症患者的得分显著高于社交恐惧症患者和对照受试者;社交恐惧症患者的得分高于对照组。结果支持了问卷的信度(重测)和内部一致性。与对照受试者相比,强迫症患者和社交恐惧症受试者在总量表上的得分显著升高。然而,社交恐惧症患者与强迫症患者并无差异。因此,通过R量表评估的伤害责任似乎并非强迫症所特有。这一发现不支持两项研究(28、30)的结果。但这两项研究将强迫症患者与一个包括广场恐惧症伴惊恐障碍、广泛性焦虑症和社交恐惧症的焦虑组进行了比较。与强迫症症状测量的相关性高于与焦虑和抑郁的相关性。最后,仅在对照组中研究了因子结构。探索性因子分析表明,R量表是一个二维量表,反映了预防风险的需求和认为自己有伤害能力的信念。第一个维度对病理学的特异性低于第二个维度。与非临床组相比,只有强迫症患者在“预防风险的需求”上得分显著升高。两个焦虑组在“认为自己有伤害能力的信念”上与非临床组存在差异,但社交恐惧症患者与强迫症患者并无差异。总之,R量表的两个子量表并未区分强迫症患者和社交恐惧症受试者。需要进一步研究来重复本研究结果并确认R量表的两个维度。总体而言,结果与责任信念在强迫观念问题体验中很重要这一假设一致。然而,诸如认为自己有伤害能力的责任假定在社交恐惧症中也存在。