van den Hout Marcel, Kindt Merel
Department of Medical, Clinical and Experimental Psychology, University of Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, Netherlands.
Behav Res Ther. 2003 Mar;41(3):301-16. doi: 10.1016/s0005-7967(02)00012-8.
This paper attempts to explain why in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) checkers distrust in memory persists despite extensive checking. It is argued that: (1) repeated checking increases familiarity with the issues checked; (2) increased familiarity promotes conceptual processing which inhibits perceptual processing; (3) inhibited perceptual processing makes recollections less vivid and detailed and finally; (4) reduction in vividness and detail promotes distrust in memory. An interactive computer animation was developed in which participants had to perform checking rituals on a virtual gas stove. Two separate experiments were carried out with n=39 (Experiment I) and n=40 (Experiment II) healthy participants. In both studies, the control group and the experimental group were given the same pre-test and post-test on the virtual gas stove. In between, the experimental group engaged in 'relevant checking', i.e. checking the gas stove, while the control group engaged in 'irrelevant checking', i.e. checking virtual light bulbs. In both experiments there were powerful effects of repeated 'relevant checking': while actual memory accuracy remained unaffected, the vividness and detail of the recollections were greatly reduced. Most pertinently, in both experiments relevant checking undermined confidence in memory. No such effects were observed in the control group. One might argue that the pre-test/post-test design may have made the control group anticipate a memory assessment at the post-test and that this artifact made them relatively alert producing memory confidence at post test that was artificially high. A third experiment was carried out (n=2 x 20) in which no pre-test was given while, other than that, Experiment III was identical to the first two experiments. Results confirmed earlier findings: compared to the irrelevant checking control group, recollections in the relevant checking group were non-vivid, non-detailed while confidence in memory was low. The theory and data suggest an answer to the question 'why memory distrust persists despite repetitive checking'. In people who check extensively, memory distrust may persist as a result of repetitive checking. OCD checking may be motivated by the wish to reduce uncertainty, but checking appears to be a counter-productive safety strategy. Rather than reducing doubt, checking fosters doubt and ironically increases meta-memory problems.
本文试图解释为何在强迫症（OCD）中，尽管进行了大量检查，检查者对记忆的不信任依然存在。本文认为：（1）反复检查会增加对所检查问题的熟悉度；（2）熟悉度增加会促进概念加工，从而抑制知觉加工；（3）受抑制的知觉加工会使回忆变得不那么生动和详细，最终；（4）生动性和细节的减少会导致对记忆的不信任。开发了一个交互式计算机动画，参与者必须在虚拟煤气灶上执行检查程序。对39名健康参与者（实验I）和40名健康参与者（实验II）进行了两项独立实验。在两项研究中，对照组和实验组在虚拟煤气灶上接受相同的前测和后测。在此期间，实验组进行“相关检查”，即检查煤气灶，而对照组进行“无关检查”，即检查虚拟灯泡。在两项实验中，反复进行“相关检查”都产生了显著效果：虽然实际记忆准确性未受影响，但回忆的生动性和细节大大降低。最相关的是，在两项实验中，相关检查都削弱了对记忆的信心。在对照组中未观察到此类效果。有人可能会认为，前测/后测设计可能使对照组预期在后测时会进行记忆评估，而这种人为因素使他们相对警觉，从而在后测时产生了人为偏高的记忆信心。进行了第三个实验（n = 2×20），其中没有进行前测，除此之外，实验III与前两个实验相同。结果证实了早期的发现：与无关检查对照组相比，相关检查组的回忆不生动、不详细，同时对记忆的信心较低。该理论和数据为“为何尽管反复检查，对记忆的不信任依然存在”这一问题提供了答案。在进行大量检查的人群中，由于反复检查，对记忆的不信任可能会持续存在。强迫症检查可能是出于减少不确定性的愿望，但检查似乎是一种适得其反的安全策略。检查非但没有减少疑虑，反而滋生了疑虑，具有讽刺意味的是，还增加了元记忆问题。
