Croft James, Grisham Jessica R, Perfors Andrew, Hayes Brett K
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Mathews Building, Kensington, Sydney, NSW 2052 Australia.
School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2022;44(2):364-375. doi: 10.1007/s10862-021-09901-3. Epub 2021 Nov 22.
An experiment examined decision-making processes among nonclinical participants with low or high levels of OCD symptomatology (N = 303). To better simulate the decision environments that are most likely to be problematic for clients with OCD, we employed decision tasks that incorporated "black swan" options that have a very low probability but involve substantial loss. When faced with a choice between a safer option that involved no risk of loss or a riskier alternative with a very low probability of substantial loss, most participants chose the safer option regardless of OCD symptom level. However, when faced with choices between options that had similar expected values to the previous choices, but where each option had some low risk of a substantial loss, there was a significant shift towards riskier decisions. These effects were stronger when the task involved a contamination based, health-relevant decision task as compared to one with financial outcomes. The results suggest that both low and high symptom OC participants approach decisions involving risk-free options and decisions involving risky alternatives in qualitatively different ways. There was some evidence that measures of impulsivity were better predictors of the shift to risky decision making than OCD symptomatology.
一项实验研究了强迫症症状水平低或高的非临床参与者（N = 303）的决策过程。为了更好地模拟对强迫症患者最可能有问题的决策环境，我们采用了包含“黑天鹅”选项的决策任务，这些选项概率极低但损失巨大。当面临一个无损失风险的更安全选项和一个有极低概率产生巨大损失的风险更高选项之间的选择时，大多数参与者无论强迫症症状水平如何都选择了更安全的选项。然而，当面临预期值与先前选择相似但每个选项都有一定低概率产生巨大损失的选项之间的选择时，出现了向风险更高决策的显著转变。与涉及财务结果的任务相比，当任务涉及基于污染的、与健康相关的决策任务时，这些效应更强。结果表明，强迫症症状水平低和高的参与者在处理涉及无风险选项的决策和涉及有风险选项的决策时，方式在质上有所不同。有一些证据表明，冲动性测量指标比强迫症症状更能预测向风险决策的转变。
