Skip to main content
Log in

The Beliefs About Memory Inventory (BAMI) and Its Ability to Predict Compulsive Checking

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognitive Therapy and Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

One of the most common compulsions in obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is repeated checking. Negative beliefs about memory ability have previously been shown to cause and to be predictive of checking behaviour. This suggests they represent an important belief domain that should be assessed and targeted in psychological treatments for OCD. Beliefs about the importance and reliability of memory may also relate to checking. These beliefs have yet to be investigated, however, and a measure to assess these constructs is warranted. Thus, the purpose of this pair of studies was to develop the Beliefs about Memory Inventory (BAMI).

Methods

In Study 1, participants were non-clinical undergraduates (n = 760) and a small sample of clinical participants with OCD who reported primary checking concerns (n = 24). They completed the potential BAMI items, along with measures of OCD symptoms, beliefs, and related psychopathology domains.

Results

An exploratory factor analysis revealed a 2-factor solution with items pertaining to (1) beliefs about memory ability (MA) and (2) beliefs about memory importance (MI). Given the low number of items in the MI factor, a second iteration of the BAMI was developed (Study 2). It was completed by undergraduate students (n = 483) in order to assess the updated version. The final version of the self-report questionnaire had the same two factors and exhibited strong psychometric properties. BAMI factors were predictive of checking symptoms over and above previously known OCD belief domains related to checking, including inflated responsibility and overestimation of threat.

Conclusions

The BAMI holds promise for both research and clinical use. Results are discussed within the framework of cognitive theory of and treatments for OCD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Samantha Wilson for her assistance with the online survey configuration and data collection, as well as Stefanie Lavoie, Sarah McIlwaine, Kelsey Hannon, and Sarah Schell for their help with data collection. This study was funded in part by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant (RGPIN 249833 2007) and by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Operating Grant (MOP 119283).

Funding

This study was funded in part by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant (RGPIN 249833 2007) and by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Operating Grant (MOP 119283).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam S. Radomsky.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Gillian M. Alcolado and Adam S. Radomsky declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

Approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of Concordia University. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 16 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alcolado, G.M., Radomsky, A.S. The Beliefs About Memory Inventory (BAMI) and Its Ability to Predict Compulsive Checking. Cogn Ther Res 47, 140–154 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-022-10340-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-022-10340-x

Keywords

Navigation