Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-xq9c7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-28T12:23:04.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Habit Learning in OCD: Preliminary Data from a Spanish Sample

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2024

M. Prime Tous*
Affiliation:
1Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology Department, Institute of Neurosciences
C. Lopez Solà
Affiliation:
2Adult Psychiatry and Psychology Department, Institute of Neurosciences, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain
L. Hermida
Affiliation:
2Adult Psychiatry and Psychology Department, Institute of Neurosciences, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain
M. A. Fullana
Affiliation:
2Adult Psychiatry and Psychology Department, Institute of Neurosciences, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Instrumental learning involves goal-directed and habitual systems. The Slips-of-Action Task (SOAT) is extensively used to measure habit tendencies and the likelihood of making erroneous responses for devalued outcomes. The SOAT provides a Devaluation Sensitivity Index (DSI), a measure of the balance between relative goal-directed and habitual learning. Individuals with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) often engage in repetitive actions, suggesting a potential deficit in goal-directed control and an increased reliance on habitual learning. Previous literature has shown that medicated OCD adults performed worse on the SOAT task than healthy controls.

Objectives

To compare habit learning performance in an unmedicated sample:

  • - Goal 1: Between OCD and Healthy Controls (HC)

  • - Goal 2: Across four groups: adult OCD, adult HC, children OCD, and children HC

Methods

Participants: Eighty-three participants (44 OCD patients and 38 healthy controls) completed the study with usable task data. The 44 OCD patients comprised 17 adults (mean age: 26.76 years, SD: 8.61 years) and 27 children/adolescents (mean age: 12.84 years, SD: 2.59 years). The 38 healthy controls included 17 adults (mean age: 30 years, SD: 7.49 years) and 21 children/adolescents (mean age: 14.1 years, SD: 2.19 years). All participants were unmedicated. Measures: Participants completed an adapted version of the “Fabulous Fruit Game”, which included an instrumental training phase to learn Stimulus-Response-Outcomes (S-R-O) associations and a SOAT to assess the strength of learned S-R-O associations. DSI was calculated by subtracting the percentage of responses made toward devalued outcomes from the percentage of responses made toward still valuable outcomes. Behavioral Analyses: Student’s t-test comparing individuals with OCD to HC and a ONEWAY ANOVA to examine group differences across multiple categories.

Results

Goal 1: DSI comparison between individuals with OCD and HC revealed a significant difference, with HC demonstrating superior performance (t (60.9) = 2.60, p = .012, Cohen’s d = .546). Goal 2: The overall DSI comparison across adult OCD, adult HC, children OCD, and children HC showed a non-significant difference (F(3) = 3.407, p = 0.22). However, post hoc analysis revealed significant differences between Adult HC and Youth OCD (I-J Scheffe = 28.82, p = .033), indicating superior performance in adult HC.

Conclusions

This study highlights altered Habit Learning in unmedicated OCD individuals, supported by significant DSI differences compared to HC. Age-related distinctions were observed, emphasizing the need for age-sensitive interventions in understanding and addressing habit-related challenges in OCD.

Disclosure of Interest

None Declared

Type
Abstract
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of European Psychiatric Association
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.