The effects of familiarity on thought--action fusion

The present study examined whether beliefs about the importance of thoughts (i.e., thought–action fusion; TAF) are related to the target subject of the negative thought. One hundred and seven undergraduate students were randomly assigned to imagine either a beloved relative or a stranger being diagnosed with cancer and provided in vivo ratings of anxiety, likelihood, moral wrongness, urge to neutralize, and how upsetting the event would be if it occurred. Results indicated that thinking of a relative being diagnosed with cancer provoked more distress, urges to neutralize, and higher estimates of likelihood, as well greater use of mental neutralizing behaviors, compared to thinking of a stranger. Contrary to our prediction, the groups did not differ in their ratings of the moral wrongness. These findings broadly support the assertion that the more personally significant a negative intrusive thought, the more it will provoke distress and urges to neutralize. Results are discussed in terms of the cognitive model of obsessions and clinical implications are addressed.