They include five points: positive worry philosophy (“Worrying support me to prevent problems subsequently”), thinking regarding the uncontrollability and possibilities (“My personal alarming is unsafe in my situation”), cognitive proficiency (“You will find nothing confidence in my own memory to possess conditions and you will labels”), general bad thinking (“If i did not handle a worrying envision, following it just happened, www.datingranking.net/nl/swipe-overzicht it could be my personal fault”), and you will intellectual notice-understanding (“I think much regarding my advice”). The new metacognition survey was scored inside a great 4 point measure regarding step one (“don’t concur”) so you can cuatro (“concur really”) along with a great Chronbach’s alpha = .88. This new metacognition questionnaire has been used commonly in the low-systematic trials eg smokers and you can children [forty-two, 45]. A whole score are calculated to form a collection out-of metacognition for every fellow member.
The new Fanatical-Fanatical Index try good 42-product notice-report survey, evaluating the seriousness of some obsessions and compulsions of OCD inside the adults . The fresh new compulsive-fanatical inventory includes eight subscales that are included with laundry (“I tidy my hands more frequently or longer than needed”), examining (“I go back into places so I’ve maybe not injured individuals”), doubt (“Even in the event I do things cautiously I’m that it is not quite right”), purchasing (“I get distressed in the event that other people provides changed how i has actually build my personal one thing”), obsessing (“I find it difficult to control my viewpoint”), hoarding (“I assemble things I don’t you prefer”), and you can neutralising (“I feel I have to recite particular numbers”). Which list is actually obtained to your a good 4 point Likert scale, in one (“definitely not”) to help you cuatro (“extremely”) and had a beneficial Chronbach’s leader = .88. A total score is actually calculated to create one to get for every single new member related to O-C episodes.
A chance shot off college students took part in the analysis. Participants was in fact firstly presented with information about the study and you will considering the ability to inquire about this. After offering concur, for every single participant provided demographic pointers, after which were presented with the newest four questionnaires inside the a good counterbalanced purchase to resolve during the her big date. In the event that participant accomplished they is actually thanked and debriefed. Every material and procedures used this new ethical assistance and functions in depth by the American Mental Organization and you will were seemed and you will approved from the University out-of Hertfordshire ethics committee (Number:14149216).
Investigation try processed to possess lost thinking, outliers and you will assumptions out of mathematical study ahead of people studies . The details had appropriate viewpoints to have skewness and you can kurtosis without high outliers. Bivariate correlations of one’s an incredible number of most of the computed spiders found positive and extreme connections among them (Table step 1). The best association is within spiders of county and characteristic anxiety, with this new association ranging from stress susceptibility, metacognition and you can O-C periods.
Our first prediction was that metacognition and anxiety (state and trait) would be significant predictors of O-C symptoms. Consistent with our expectations all variables were associated to O-C symptoms in significant and positive correlations (all ps < .001) [24, 30, 33].
In order to investigate the relative importance of each of the computed index on the prediction of O-C symptoms all the indexes were used as simultaneous predictors of O-C symptoms in a multivariate regression analysis. Results revealed that metacognition was the best predictor of O-C symptoms (? = .41, p < .001), followed by trait anxiety (? = .21, p < .05), state anxiety (? = .16, p = .08), and anxiety sensitivity (? = .04, p = .63). The overall model resulted significant, R 2 = .49, F(4, 151) = , p < .001). Although previous research indicated that anxiety sensitivity is a good predictor of O-C symptoms , the inclusion of the other variables reduced its effect to a non-significant level.