Grassi Giacomo, Pallanti Stefano, Righi Lorenzo, Figee Martijn, Mantione Mariska, Denys Damiaan, Piccagliani Daniele, Rossi Alessandro, Stratta Paolo
Department of Neurofarba, University of Florence , Florence, Italy.
Department of Molecular and Developmental Medicine, University of Siena , Siena, Italy.
J Behav Addict. 2015 Dec;4(4):263-72. doi: 10.1556/2006.4.2015.039.
Recent studies have challenged the anxiety-avoidance model of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), linking OCD to impulsivity, risky-decision-making and reward-system dysfunction, which can also be found in addiction and might support the conceptualization of OCD as a behavioral addiction. Here, we conducted an exploratory investigation of the behavioral addiction model of OCD by assessing whether OCD patients are more impulsive, have impaired decision-making, and biased probabilistic reasoning, three core dimensions of addiction, in a sample of OCD patients and healthy controls.
We assessed these dimensions on 38 OCD patients and 39 healthy controls with the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11), the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and the Beads Task.
OCD patients had significantly higher BIS-11 scores than controls, in particular on the cognitive subscales. They performed significantly worse than controls on the IGT preferring immediate reward despite negative future consequences, and did not learn from losses. Finally, OCD patients demonstrated biased probabilistic reasoning as reflected by significantly fewer draws to decision than controls on the Beads Task.
OCD patients are more impulsive than controls and demonstrate risky decision-making and biased probabilistic reasoning. These results might suggest that other conceptualizations of OCD, such as the behavioral addiction model, may be more suitable than the anxiety-avoidance one. However, further studies directly comparing OCD and behavioral addiction patients are needed in order to scrutinize this model.
近期研究对强迫症(OCD)的焦虑-回避模型提出了挑战,将强迫症与冲动性、冒险决策及奖励系统功能障碍联系起来,这些在成瘾行为中也有体现,可能支持将强迫症概念化为一种行为成瘾。在此,我们通过评估强迫症患者在冲动性、决策受损及概率推理偏差(成瘾的三个核心维度)方面是否比健康对照更明显,对强迫症的行为成瘾模型进行了探索性研究。
我们使用巴雷特冲动性量表(BIS-11)、爱荷华赌博任务(IGT)和珠子任务,对38名强迫症患者和39名健康对照进行了这些维度的评估。
强迫症患者的BIS-11得分显著高于对照组,尤其是在认知子量表上。在IGT中,他们表现得比对照组差得多,尽管会有负面的未来后果,仍偏好即时奖励,且不从损失中吸取教训。最后,在珠子任务中,强迫症患者表现出概率推理偏差,表现为做出决策前抽取的次数明显少于对照组。
强迫症患者比对照组更冲动,表现出冒险决策和概率推理偏差。这些结果可能表明,强迫症的其他概念化方式,如行为成瘾模型,可能比焦虑-回避模型更合适。然而,需要进一步直接比较强迫症患者和行为成瘾患者的研究来审视这一模型。