CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 137Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Danger ideation reduction therapy (DIRT) for obsessive–compulsive washers. A controlled trial

Jones, Mairwen K., Menzies, Ross G.·1998·Behaviour Research and Therapy
DOI 10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00057-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Twenty-one OCD sufferers with washing/contamination concerns took part in a controlled treatment trial at the Anxiety Disorders Clinic, University of Sydney. Eleven of the subjects received danger ideation reduction therapy (DIRT) over eight, 1 h weekly group sessions conducted by the second author. Ten subjects were placed on a wait list and did not receive DIRT or any other treatment. DIRT procedures were solely directed at decreasing danger-related expectancies concerning contamination and did not include exposure, response prevention or behavioral experiments. Components of DIRT include attentional focusing, filmed interviews, corrective information, cognitive restructuring, expert testimony, microbiological experiments and a probability of catastrophe assessment task. All subjects were assessed at pre-treatment, post-treatment and three-month follow-up using the Maudsley Obsessional-Compulsive Inventory, Leyton Obsessionality Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory and a Self Rating of Severity Scale. Changes from pre-treatment to after treatment (post-treatment and follow-up scores averaged) were significantly greater in the DIRT condition than in the control condition for all measures. No significant differences were obtained between groups on post-treatment to follow-up change on any measure. The implications of these findings for theoretical models of OCD and its management are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00057-6

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A pair of Australian studies evaluated DIRT provides perhaps strongest evidence for efficacy of more purely cognitive interventions that do not involve any exposure procedures.

    “a pair of Australian studies (Jones and Menzies, 1998; Krochmalik et al., 2004) that evaluated a novel cognitive intervention called Danger Ideation Reduction Therapy (DIRT) provides perhaps the strongest evidence for the efficacy of more purely cognitive interventions that do not involve any exposure procedures.”

    From An update on the efficacy of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder in adults (2013) · cites this paper as Jones and Menzies, 1998

  • In first study of patients with primarily contamination/washing symptoms, DIRT resulted in markedly greater reductions in OCD symptoms compared to wait list control.

    “In the first of two studies of patients presenting with primarily contamination/washing symptoms, DIRT resulted in markedly greater reductions in OCD symptoms as compared to a wait list control (Jones & Menzies, 1998).”

    From An update on the efficacy of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder in adults (2013) · cites this paper as Jones & Menzies, 1998

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jones, M. K., & Menzies, R. G.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Jones, Mairwen K.
ORCID
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-10
Volume
36
Issue
10
Pages
959-970
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00057-6
OpenAlex
W2040704693
Cited by
137
References
38
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 33
FWCI
2.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, cognitive restructuring, expert testimony, group therapy, depression
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Compulsive Behavior, Female, Hand Disinfection, Humans, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Psychotherapy, Rational-Emotive, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome

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