(PS3-C70) The Relationship Between Tolerance of Uncontrollability and Obsessive-compulsive Symptom Dimensions

Intolerance of uncertainty (IU; i.e., finding the experience of not knowing an outcome to be aversive), has been hypothesized to be an important factor in the development and maintenance of obsessive-compulsive (OC) symptoms. However, research thus far has not differentiated between the aversiveness of not knowing an outcome versus the aversiveness of not having control over an outcome (i.e., tolerance of uncontrollability; TOU). The primary aim of this study was therefore to examine the relative contributions of IU and TOU in the prediction of OC symptom dimensions.

 Participants were 350 undergraduate psychology students who completed online questionnaires consisting of the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), Tolerance of Uncontrollability Questionnaire (TOUQ), Intolerance of Uncertainty Questionnaire (IUS-12) and Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS). Correlations were computed to assess bivariate relationships among variables. Hierarchical linear regressions were performed with the DOCS subscales (Contamination, Responsibility for Harm, Unacceptable Thoughts, and Symmetry) as the dependent variables. DASS subscales scores were entered in Step 1, and IUS and TOUQ scores were entered simultaneously in Step 2. Data collection is still in progress, thus preliminary analyses are presented for data collected to date (N = 162).   

 TOUQ scores were significantly correlated with all DOCS symptom dimensions (r = -.15 - -.25), DASS subscales (r = -.32 - -.40), and IUS total scores (r = -.47). The overall regression predicting DOCS-Contamination was significant (R² = .15, p < .001) with IUS scores emerging as the only significant predictor (β = .37, p < .001). The regression predicting DOCS-Responsibility for Harm was significant (R² = .25, p < .001), with IUS scores again emerging as the only significant individual predictor (β = .28, p = .001). The regression predicting DOCS-Unacceptable Thoughts was significant (R² = .28, p < .001), with DASS-depression (β = .19, p = .041) and DASS-anxiety (β = .26, p = .020) emerging as significant predictors. Notably, neither IUS scores (β = .08, p = .376) nor TOUQ scores (β = .04, p = .629) were significant predictors, and combined did not account for a significant portion of variance (ΔR² = 0, p = .663). Finally, the regression predicting DOCS-Symmetry was also significant (R² = .14, p < .001), with no significant individual predictors.

 Although preliminary, these results suggest that IU better predicts OC symptoms than TOU. Thus, it seems that for individuals with OC symptoms, not knowing an outcome is more meaningfully related to their symptom severity than a perceived lack of control over an outcome. However, it is possible that the TOUQ, which assesses general acceptance of uncontrollability, may have lacked the specificity necessary to capture this construct for individuals with OC symptoms. Indeed, it is possible that a measure of tolerance of uncontrollability for constructs related to OC symptoms (e.g., tolerance of uncontrollability of thoughts) may have yielded different results. Therefore, future research should still seek to explore the relationship between TOU and OC symptoms.