Risk Judgment in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Testing a Dual-Systems Account

Dual-systems theorists posit distinct modes of reasoning. The intuition system reasons automatically and its processes are unavailable to conscious introspection. The deliberation system reasons effortfully while its processes recruit working memory. The current paper extends the application of such theories to the study of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). Patients with OCD often retain insight into their irrationality, implying dissociable systems of thought: intuition produces obsessions and fears that deliberation observes and attempts (vainly) to inhibit. To test the notion that dual-systems theory can adequately describe OCD, we obtained speeded and unspeeded risk judgments from OCD patients and non-anxious controls in order to quantify the differential effects of intuitive and deliberative reasoning. As predicted, patients deemed negative events to be more likely than controls. Patients also took more time in producing judgments than controls. Furthermore, when forced to respond quickly patients' judgments were more affected than controls'. Although patients did attenuate judgments when given additional time, their estimates never reached the levels of controls'. We infer from these data that patients have genuine difficulty inhibiting their intuitive cognitive system. Our dual-systems perspective is compatible with current theories of the disorder. Similar behavioral tests may prove helpful in better understanding related anxiety disorders. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Assessment Of Dynamic Properties Of A Crowd Model For Human-Structure Interaction Modeling

As lightweight and slender structural elements are more frequently used in the design, large scale structures become more flexible and susceptible to excessive vibrations. To ensure the functionality of the structure, dynamic properties of the occupied structure need to be estimated during the design phase. Traditional analysis method models occupants simply as an additional mass; however, research has shown that human occupants could be better modeled as an additional degree-of- freedom. In the United Kingdom, active and passive crowd models are proposed by the Joint Working Group as a result of a series of analytical and experimental research. It is expected that the crowd models would yield a more accurate estimation to the dynamic response of the occupied structure. However, experimental testing recently conducted through a graduate student project at Bucknell University indicated that the proposed passive crowd model might be inaccurate in representing the impact on the structure from the occupants. The objective of this study is to provide an assessment of the validity of the crowd models proposed by JWG through comparing the dynamic properties obtained from experimental testing data and analytical modeling results. The experimental data used in this study was collected by Firman in 2010. The analytical results were obtained by performing a time-history analysis on a finite element model of the occupied structure. The crowd models were created based on the recommendations from the JWG combined with the physical properties of the occupants during the experimental study. During this study, SAP2000 was used to create the finite element models and to implement the analysis; Matlab and ME¿scope were used to obtain the dynamic properties of the structure through processing the time-history analysis results from SAP2000. The result of this study indicates that the active crowd model could quite accurately represent the impact on the structure from occupants standing with bent knees while the passive crowd model could not properly simulate the dynamic response of the structure when occupants were standing straight or sitting on the structure. Future work related to this study involves improving the passive crowd model and evaluating the crowd models with full-scale structure models and operating data.