RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Examining uncertainty-related distress when decisions may harm oneself vs. others
Jacoby, R., Reuman, L., Blakey, S., Hartsock, J., & Abramowitz, J. (2019). "What if I make a mistake?”: Examining uncertainty-related distress when decisions may harm oneself vs. others. Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders, 20, 50-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocrd.2017.11.003
Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) is a key construct in the development and maintenance of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Recent research has examined the Beads Task as a behavioral measure of IU in which an incorrect decision is tied to an aversive outcome. The current study aimed to increase ecological validity of the Beads Task as an analog for decisional uncertainty in OCD. Specifically, we investigated whether the aversive outcome's “victim” impacted associations between IU and distress during decision-making. Undergraduates (N = 85) completed the Beads Task either alone or with a confederate partner. They were told that errors on the task would either lead to themselves (solo condition) or their “partner” (partner condition) having to complete the Cold Pressor Task (CPT). As hypothesized, participants in the partner condition experienced the Beads Task as significantly more distressing and important than those in the solo condition. Furthermore, self-report prospective IU was associated with distress about harm befalling oneself and perceived importance of the decision (solo condition), whereas inhibitory IU was associated with distress about harm befalling others (partner condition). Clinical implications for addressing uncertainty using exposure and response prevention, and future research of decision-making in the context of responsibility for harm are discussed.