Cited by 21Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Impaired generalization of reward but not loss in obsessive-compulsive disorder

Open access
Rouhani, Nina, Wimmer, George Elliott, Schneier, Franklin R., Fyer, Abby J., Shohamy, Daphna, Simpson, Helen Blair·2019·Depression and Anxiety

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Generalizing from past experiences can be adaptive by allowing those experiences to guide behavior in new situations. Generalizing too much, however, can be maladaptive. For example, individuals with pathological anxiety are believed to overgeneralize emotional responses from past threats, broadening their scope of fears. Whether individuals with pathological anxiety overgeneralize in other situations remains unclear. METHODS: The present study (N = 57) used a monetary sensory preconditioning paradigm with rewards and losses to address this question in individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and social anxiety disorder (SAD), comparing them to healthy comparison subjects (HC). In all groups, we tested direct learning of associations between cues and reward vs. loss outcomes, as well as generalization of learning to novel choice options. RESULTS: We found no differences between the three groups in the direct learning of stimuli with their outcomes: all subjects demonstrated intact stimulus-response learning by choosing rewarding options and avoiding negative ones. However, OCD subjects were less likely to generalize from rewards than either the SAD or HC groups, and this impairment was not found for losses. Additionally, greater deficits in reward generalization were correlated with severity of threat estimation, as measured by a subscale of the Obsessive Beliefs Questionnaire, both within OCD and across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that a compromised ability to generalize from rewarding events may impede adaptive behavior in OCD and in those susceptible to high estimation of threat.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/da.22857

Cites

45 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. First M, Spitzer R, Gibbon M, & William J (1996). Structured clinical interview schedule for DSM-IV axis 1 disorders, research version, patient/non-patient edition (Biometrics Research New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York). New York, NY: New York State Psychiatric Institute.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rouhani, N., Wimmer, G. E., Schneier, F. R., Fyer, A. J., Shohamy, D., & Simpson, H. B.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
  • Department of Psychology; Columbia University; New York New York
Corresponding author
Rouhani, Nina
Venue
Depression and Anxiety
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-11-28
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
121-129
ISSN
1091-4269 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2903544577
Cited by
21
References
45
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Depression and Anxiety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Mental Health
  • New York State Office of Mental Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, social anxiety disorder, threat estimation, obsessive beliefs, stimulus-response learning, pathological anxiety, fear generalization
MeSH terms
Phobia, Social, Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Cognition, Cues, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reward, Case-Control Studies, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review