Rethinking Unacceptable Thoughts: Validation of an Expanded Version of the Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale

Abstract

The Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS) is widely used to measure obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) severity across four broad symptom dimensions (i.e., contamination, responsibility for harm, unacceptable thoughts, symmetry). Despite its proven utility, there is reason to suspect that the unacceptable thoughts subscale conflates different types of unacceptable thoughts that are meaningfully distinct from one another. In the current study, we first evaluated the psychometric properties of a newly developed DOCS violent and/or aggressive thoughts subscale. We then examined the factor structure, psychometric properties, and diagnostic sensitivity of a seven-factor version of the DOCS that includes the four original DOCS subscales and three more-specific versions of the unacceptable thoughts scale (i.e., sexually intrusive thoughts, violent and/or aggressive thoughts, and scrupulous or religious thoughts). The sample included 329 residential and intensive outpatients, the majority of which had a diagnosis of OCD (75.2%). The new unacceptable thoughts subscales demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity with unique associations between the subscales and depression, suicide, and perceived threat from emotions that were not present in the broader unacceptable thoughts subscale. The seven-factor version of the DOCS demonstrated slightly lower levels of diagnostic sensitivity than the original DOCS. Thus, the four-factor version of the DOCS is recommended for screening purposes. A score of 40 or higher on the seven-factor version of the DOCS best predicted a diagnosis of OCD. Overall, the three additional unacceptable thoughts subscales appear to be distinct factors that have potential value in research and clinical settings.