Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×

Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.

  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • Evidence of Impaired Event-Based Prospective Memory in Clinical Obsessive–Compulsive Checking

  • Lynne M. Harris, Lisa Vaccaro, Mairwen K. Jones, Georgina M. Boots
  • Journal:
    Behaviour Change / Volume 27 / Issue 2 / 01 June 2010
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    22 February 2012, pp. 84-92

  • Based on findings from subclinical OCD checking samples (Cuttler & Graf, 2007; 2008), Cuttler and Graf (2009) suggested that checking may develop to compensate for prospective memory failures. The present study provides the first evidence of prospective memory problems in a clinical sample of OCD checkers (n = 26) compared to a group of healthy controls (n = 26). Consistent with earlier work with subclinical samples, the OCD checkers performed more poorly on an event-based, but not a time-based, prospective memory task. However, the OCD checkers did not report more subjective prospective memory failures than controls and their confidence in prospective memory accuracy was higher than that of controls. An explanation of the inconsistent findings with regard to metamemory in clinical and subclinical OCD checking is provided. Further research assessing both subjective memory performance and the strategies understood to support memory is needed to clarify the contribution of prospective memory to OCD checking.