The present study sought to establish whether a constellation of world and self assumptions would predict OC severity scores, and whether these assumptions would independently be related to OCD severity over and above other affective and cognitive variables. We also aimed to establish the degree to which world and self assumptions are related to OC symptom dimensions over and above the currently accepted affective and cognitive variables.
Firstly, it was hypothesized that world view assumptions would predict OC severity scores. Specifically, it was expected that OC severity would be predicted by increased justice (i.e., perception of the world as fair), controllability (i.e., harm can be avoided in the world) and self-controllability (i.e., perceptions of oneself as active in the prevention of harm) assumptions and decreased benevolence of world and self-deservingness assumptions. In addition, two interaction effects were expected. That is, negative assessment of self-deservingness was expected to further increase OC tendencies in the context of high justice beliefs, and positive assessment of self-controllability was expected to further increase OC severity in the context of high controllability beliefs. Secondly, it was hypothesized that this world view model would predict OC severity scores over and above the currently accepted obsessive compulsive related cognitions and depressive symptoms. Lastly, controllability assumptions (i.e., controllability, self-controllability, and their interaction) were expected to be significant predictors of overt symptoms (e.g., checking and washing) over and above OC relevant beliefs and depression symptoms, while morality related assumptions (i.e., justice, self-deservingness, and their interactions) were expected to predict covert symptoms (e.g., thoughts and impulses of harm) over and above OC relevant beliefs and depression symptoms.