Cited by 44Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Obsessive–compulsive disorder patients have a reduced sense of control on the illusion of control task

Open access
Gillan, Claire M., Morein-Zamir, Sharon, Durieux, Alice M. S., Fineberg, Naomi A., Sahakian, Barbara J., Robbins, Trevor W.·2014·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

There is disagreement regarding the role of perceived control in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The present study used a traditional illusion of control paradigm (Alloy and Abramson, 1979) to empirically test control estimation in OCD. Twenty-six OCD patients and 26 matched comparison subjects completed an illusion of control task wherein their goal was to attempt to exert control over a light bulb. The density of reinforcement (high, low) and the valence of trials (gain, loss) were experimentally manipulated within subjects. Unbeknownst to participants, the illumination of the light bulb was predetermined and irrespective of their behavior. OCD patients exhibited lower estimates of control compared with healthy comparison subjects. There were no interactions between group and outcome density or group and valence. We found that OCD patients endorse lower estimates of control than comparison subjects. This finding highlights a potential role for contingency learning in the disorder.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00204

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • Exposure to uncontrollable stressors biases controllability estimation, establishing relevance for neuropsychiatric disorders involving altered perceptions of controllability.

    “Furthermore, exposure to uncontrollable stressors biases this process assessed by the explore-and-predict task, hence establishing its relevance for the study of neuropsychiatric disorders involving altered perceptions of controllability 9,12,13,35 .”

    From Stress-sensitive inference of task controllability (2022) · cites this paper as [12]

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. Salkovskis P. M. (1996). “Cognitive-behavioral approaches to the understanding of obsessional problems”, in Current Controversies in the Anxiety Disorders ed. Rapee R. M. (New York: Guilford Press) 103– 133

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gillan, C. M., Morein-Zamir, S., Durieux, A. M. S., Fineberg, N. A., Sahakian, B. J., & Robbins, T. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Hertfordshire (GB)
Corresponding author
Gillan, Claire M.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2014-03-13
Volume
5
Pages
204-204
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2002906712
Cited by
44
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Anglia Ruskin Research Online (Anglia Ruskin University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (089589/Z/09/Z, 089589, G00001354, 093875)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Medical Research Council (G00001354, 089589/Z/09/Z)
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, perceived control, illusion of control, contingency learning, reinforcement density

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