ArticleJournal of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders2025
Risk-aversion with both high and low ambiguity: Elevated OCD symptom severity and intolerance of uncertainty are associated with less risk-taking in an OCD patient sub-sample.
Article in Journal of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In clinical settings, patients with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) are generally risk-averse, especially in the context of uncertainty. However, the literature examining risk-taking in OCD is conflicting, and studies directly comparing risk-taking under conditions of high versus low ambiguity are scant. In the current study, 60 participants (30 OCD, 30 non-psychiatric controls) completed a modified version of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) in which they "pumped" a virtual balloon and earned five cents for each pump; however, if the balloon popped, they lost the money accumulated in that round. The task had two levels of ambiguity: the risk level of each balloon (i.e., likelihood of it exploding) was either visually displayed (low ambiguity) or unknown (high ambiguity). The outcome was the average number of pumps for balloons that did not explode, with higher scores indicating more risk-taking. There was a main effect of ambiguity, such that participants took more risks on the low ambiguity BART compared to the high ambiguity version. Contrary to hypotheses, there was no ambiguity level x diagnostic group interaction. Within the OCD group, however, intolerance of uncertainty, OCD symptom severity, trait anxiety, and depression severity were negatively associated with risk-taking. Without a clinical control group, we're unable to determine specificity of these effects to OCD. The within-subjects design may have contributed to carryover effects. Findings underscore the importance of symptom dimensional measurement beyond mere presence or absence of diagnosis when predicting risk-aversion in OCD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.