1. The Effect of Negative Mood on Constructs Related to Compulsions By Gary Britton & Graham Davey

2. The Toothbrush Effect

3. Constructs & Theories of Compulsions Mood-as-input hypothesis (MacDonald & Davey, 2005) Mood-as-input hypothesis (MacDonald & Davey, 2005) Inflated Responsibility (Salkovskis, 1985) Inflated Responsibility (Salkovskis, 1985) Elevated Evidence Requirements (Wahl, Salkovskis & Cotter, 2007) Elevated Evidence Requirements (Wahl, Salkovskis & Cotter, 2007) Not Just Right Experiences (Coles, Frost, Heimberg & Rheaume, 2003) Not Just Right Experiences (Coles, Frost, Heimberg & Rheaume, 2003) Intolerance of Uncertainty (Dugas et al., 1998) Intolerance of Uncertainty (Dugas et al., 1998)

4. Mood-as-input Hypothesis Positive MoodNegative mood ‘AS MANY AS CAN’ STOP RULE ‘FEEL LIKE CONTINUING’ STOP RULE ‘AS MANY AS CAN’ STOP RULE ‘FEEL LIKE CONTINUING’ STOP RULE PERSEVERATION AT A TASK/COMPULSIVE BEHAVIOR Clinical Interest

5. Purpose of the Research The Toothbrush Effect The Toothbrush Effect Risk Factors v Causes Risk Factors v Causes How Do Explanatory Constructs for Compulsions Interact? How Do Explanatory Constructs for Compulsions Interact? Questionnaires & Experiments Questionnaires & Experiments

6. Questionnaire Study Purpose: to explore relationships between possible causal factors involved in OCD and their relationship with different sub- components of OCD Purpose: to explore relationships between possible causal factors involved in OCD and their relationship with different sub- components of OCD Sample (n = 191; male = 41, female = 150; age = M: 34.26, SD: 13.01) Sample (n = 191; male = 41, female = 150; age = M: 34.26, SD: 13.01) Non-clinical, student, opportunity sample Non-clinical, student, opportunity sample

7. Measures Compulsion Measures: (MOCI, CBOCI, OBQ). Compulsion Measures: (MOCI, CBOCI, OBQ). Construct Measures: Responsibility (RAS), Intolerance of Uncertainty (IUS), Not Just Right Experiences (NJRE-QR), Elevated Evidence Requirements, Stop Rules for Checking (AMAC/FLC) Construct Measures: Responsibility (RAS), Intolerance of Uncertainty (IUS), Not Just Right Experiences (NJRE-QR), Elevated Evidence Requirements, Stop Rules for Checking (AMAC/FLC) Mood Measures: Depression (BDI), Trait Anxiety (STAI Y2), Trait Mood (PANAS) Mood Measures: Depression (BDI), Trait Anxiety (STAI Y2), Trait Mood (PANAS)

8. Regression Analysis Focused on compulsions sub-scale of CBOCI as outcome variable Focused on compulsions sub-scale of CBOCI as outcome variable All measures entered into one model using forced entry All measures entered into one model using forced entry

9. Regression Analysis – Results 1 4 significant predictors in model: 4 significant predictors in model: Negative mood (=.24, p <.001).Negative mood (=.24, p <.001). AMAC (=.36, p <.001).AMAC (=.36, p <.001). Not just right experiencesNot just right experiences (=.18, p <.05). Elevated evidence requirementsElevated evidence requirements (= -.12, p <.05). (A negative relationship was expected due to scale used in the EER questionnaire. It represents the negative relationship between low evidence requirements and compulsion scores). (A negative relationship was expected due to scale used in the EER questionnaire. It represents the negative relationship between low evidence requirements and compulsion scores).

10. Regression Analysis – Results 2 All 4 variables remained significant in further exploratory, hierarchical regression analyses All 4 variables remained significant in further exploratory, hierarchical regression analyses No other predictor variables were significant No other predictor variables were significant Nonsignificant predictor variables were responsibility and intolerance of uncertainty Nonsignificant predictor variables were responsibility and intolerance of uncertainty

11. Schematic Model

12. Experimental Study Experimental Manipulation of Predictor Variables Experimental Manipulation of Predictor Variables Where do Responsibility & Intolerance of Uncertainty fit in? Where do Responsibility & Intolerance of Uncertainty fit in?

13. Manipulating Mood Negative Mood & Mood-as-input Predictions Negative Mood & Mood-as-input Predictions Negative Mood Induces Higher Performance Standards (Scott & Cervone, 2002) Negative Mood Induces Higher Performance Standards (Scott & Cervone, 2002) Negative Mood Promotes a Systematic Information-Processing Style (Tiedens & Linton, 2001) Negative Mood Promotes a Systematic Information-Processing Style (Tiedens & Linton, 2001)

14. Method Student sample: (males: 7; females: 52; age: M = 21.03, SD = 5.61). Student sample: (males: 7; females: 52; age: M = 21.03, SD = 5.61). 2 groups (negative mood group [n = 29] and positive mood group [n = 30]). 2 groups (negative mood group [n = 29] and positive mood group [n = 30]). Participants were told the experiment was about “music and music comprehension” to help disguise the mood induction. Participants were told the experiment was about “music and music comprehension” to help disguise the mood induction.

15. Mood Induction Participants were induced into a negative or positive mood through listening to music on headphones shown in previous studies to alter mood in the intended direction (negative mood music: Gyorgy Ligeti, Lux Aeterna; positive mood music; Delibes, Mazurka from Coppelia). Participants were induced into a negative or positive mood through listening to music on headphones shown in previous studies to alter mood in the intended direction (negative mood music: Gyorgy Ligeti, Lux Aeterna; positive mood music; Delibes, Mazurka from Coppelia).

16. Measures Participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire (they were told this questionnaire was part of a different experiment) containing questions measuring mood and VAS questions measuring: Participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire (they were told this questionnaire was part of a different experiment) containing questions measuring mood and VAS questions measuring: responsibilityresponsibility stop rulesstop rules elevated evidence requirementselevated evidence requirements not just right experiencesnot just right experiences intolerance of uncertainty.intolerance of uncertainty. Participants were then given a fictitious music comprehension questionnaire as well as full version questionnaires measuring compulsions (CBOCI), responsibility (RAS), intolerance of uncertainty (IUS), not just right experiences (NJRE-QR), elevated evidence requirements, stop rules, and mood Participants were then given a fictitious music comprehension questionnaire as well as full version questionnaires measuring compulsions (CBOCI), responsibility (RAS), intolerance of uncertainty (IUS), not just right experiences (NJRE-QR), elevated evidence requirements, stop rules, and mood

17. Results – Mood Inductions Negative group (m = 30.67) significantly sadder than positive group (m = 9.57) (p <.001). Negative group (m = 30.67) significantly sadder than positive group (m = 9.57) (p <.001). Positive group (m = 73.90) significantly happier than negative group (m = 56.79) (p <.001). Positive group (m = 73.90) significantly happier than negative group (m = 56.79) (p <.001). Negative group (m = 37.59) significantly more anxious than positive group (m = 18.20) (p <.01) Negative group (m = 37.59) significantly more anxious than positive group (m = 18.20) (p <.01)

18. Results – Dependent Variables Negative Group (m=35.8 v 25.7) score significantly higher on responsibility (p<.05) Negative Group (m=35.8 v 25.7) score significantly higher on responsibility (p<.05) Negative Group (m=60.3 v 46.8) score significantly higher on AMAC (p<.05) Negative Group (m=60.3 v 46.8) score significantly higher on AMAC (p<.05) Positive Group (m=66.6 v 48.4) score significantly higher on FL (p<.05) Positive Group (m=66.6 v 48.4) score significantly higher on FL (p<.05) Negative Group (m=41.3 v 32.2) score significantly higher on Intolerance of Uncertainty (p<.05, one-tailed) Negative Group (m=41.3 v 32.2) score significantly higher on Intolerance of Uncertainty (p<.05, one-tailed) No effect of Mood on NJRE or Elevated Evidence Requirements (both ps >.1) No effect of Mood on NJRE or Elevated Evidence Requirements (both ps >.1)

19. Adjusted Model

20. Future Studies Experimental Manipulations Experimental Manipulations ResponsibilityResponsibility Stop RulesStop Rules Intolerance of UncertaintyIntolerance of Uncertainty Construct Overlap Construct Overlap Factor AnalysisFactor Analysis Overarching Theoretical Processes Overarching Theoretical Processes Systematic v Heuristic Processing of InformationSystematic v Heuristic Processing of Information