They consists of four circumstances: self-confident worry philosophy (“Worrying facilitate me to avoid troubles afterwards”), viewpoints on the uncontrollability and you may possibilities (“My personal worrying is actually risky in my situation”), cognitive ability (“I have little rely on in my own memory getting conditions and you may names”), general negative beliefs (“Easily did not control a worrying believe, immediately after which it simply happened, it will be my personal fault”), and you may cognitive worry about-awareness (“In my opinion much throughout the my personal viewpoint”). The new metacognition survey is obtained in the an effective 4 part level away from step 1 (“don’t consent”) to cuatro (“concur quite”) together with an excellent Chronbach’s alpha = .88. The brand new metacognition survey has been utilized widely in the non-clinical trials such as for instance smokers and you may children [forty-two, 45]. A total get try computed to create a collection away from metacognition per new member.
The brand new Obsessive-Compulsive Index is actually a beneficial 42-items thinking-declaration survey, evaluating the severity of various obsessions and you will compulsions out of OCD from inside the people . The new obsessive-fanatical inventory consists of eight subscales that include laundry (“I wash my personal hand more frequently otherwise longer than expected”), examining (“I-go to places to ensure We have perhaps not harmed anyone”), doubting (“Regardless of if I do some thing cautiously Personally i think it is not some correct”), ordering (“I have disturb when the other people has changed the way i have install my some thing”), obsessing (“I’ve found it difficult to manage my thoughts”), hoarding (“We gather one thing I do not you prefer”), and you can neutralising (“I’m I want to recite specific number”). This list is actually scored to your an excellent 4 point Likert size, from one (“definitely not”) to help you 4 (“extremely”) along with a good Chronbach’s leader = .88. A total rating is computed to create you to rating for every single fellow member regarding O-C episodes.
Procedure
The possibility shot of college students participated in the study. Users were first and foremost presented with facts about the research and you may given the chance to seek advice regarding it. Once providing consent, for every single participant offered market advice, then was in fact served with new four surveys in the a good counterbalanced buy to answer at the their own big date. When the participant done he or she are thanked and you may debriefed. All materials and functions followed the latest ethical direction and functions intricate of the American Emotional Relationship and were checked and you may accepted from the College or university regarding Hertfordshire ethics committee (Number:14149216).
Performance
Research try screened having lost viewpoints, outliers and you will presumptions off analytical research just before people analysis . All of the details had acceptable values for skewness and kurtosis without high outliers. Bivariate correlations of your own scores of most of the calculated indexes shown confident and tall connections between them (Table 1). The best connection is within spiders off condition and you can characteristic stress, followed closely by the connection between stress awareness, metacognition and you may O-C episodes.
Our first prediction was that metacognition and anxiety (state and trait) would be significant predictors of O-C symptoms. Consistent with our expectations all variables were associated to O-C symptoms in significant and positive correlations (all ps < .001) [24, 30, 33].
In order to investigate the relative importance of each of the computed index on the prediction of O-C symptoms all the indexes were used as simultaneous predictors of O-C symptoms in a multivariate regression analysis. Results revealed that metacognition was the best predictor of O-C symptoms (? = .41, p < .001), followed by trait anxiety (? = .21, p < .05), state anxiety (? = .16, p = .08), and anxiety sensitivity (? = .04, p = .63). The overall model resulted significant, R 2 = .49, F(4, 151) = , p < .001). Although previous research indicated that anxiety sensitivity is a good predictor of O-C symptoms , the inclusion of the other variables reduced its effect to a non-significant level.