Cited by 132Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Responsibility and perfectionism in OCD: An experimental study

Bouchard, Catherine, Rhéaume, Josée, Ladouceur, Robert·1999·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

Cognitive models of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) suggest a number of different variables that may play a role in the development and maintenance of obsessive compulsive symptoms [Freeston, M. H., Rhéaume, J., & Ladouceur, R. (1996) Correcting faulty appraisals of obsessional thoughts. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 34, 433-446]. This study's aim was to verify the effect of perfectionism and excessive responsibility on checking behaviors and related variables. Twenty-four moderately perfectionistic subjects (MP) and 27 highly perfectionistic subjects (HP) were submitted to a manipulation of responsibility (low and high). After each manipulation, they had to perform a classification task during which checking behaviors were observed. Results indicate that more checking behaviors (hesitations, checking) occurred in the high responsibility condition than in the low responsibility condition for subjects of both groups. After executing the task in the high responsibility condition, HP subjects reported more influence over and responsibility for negative consequences than MP subjects. These results suggest that high perfectionistic tendencies could predispose individuals to overestimate their perceived responsibility for negative events. Furthermore, perfectionism could be conceived as playing a catalytic role in the perception of responsibility. Results are discussed according to cognitive models of OCD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00141-7

Cites

29 of 29 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?

  • It has proven difficult to experimentally induce perfectionism under laboratory conditions because inductions invariably confound perfectionism with responsibility and importance.

    “It has proven difficult to experimentally induce perfectionism under laboratory conditions as inductions invariably confound perfectionism with responsibility and importance (Bouchard et al., 1999);”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bouchard, C., Rhéaume, J., & Ladouceur, R.
Affiliations
Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Ladouceur, Robert
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-03
Volume
37
Issue
3
Pages
239-248
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042169276
Cited by
132
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, perfectionism, responsibility, checking behavior, cognitive models of OCD, cognitive appraisal, classification tasks
MeSH terms
Adult, Arousal, Attention, Defense Mechanisms, Female, Humans, Male, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Personality Assessment, Social Responsibility

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