Behov. Rex Thu. Vol. 31, No. 7, pp. 683492, 1993 0005-7967/93 $6.00 + 0.00 Printed in Great B&ah All rights reserved Copyright 0 1993 Pergamon Press Ltd

THE NATURE AND MEASUREMENT OF COMPULSIVE INDECISIVENESS

RANDY 0. FROST* and DEANNA L. SHOWS

Department of Psychology, Smith College, Northampton, MA 01060, U.S.A.

(Received 3 September 1992)

Summary-Indecisiveness is an often mentioned symptom of obsessive compulsive disorder and obsessive compulsive personality disorder, yet very little research has been done examining its nature and measurement. Three studies are presented here which examine the nature of compulsive indecisiveness using a newly developed scale. In study 1 the Indecisiveness Scale was correlated with measures of obsessionality and compulsive checking among normal Ss. It was also correlated with the maladaptive evaluative concern dimensions of perfectionism and with compulsive hoarding. In study 2 indecisive S s (as measured by the Indecisiveness Scale) were found to score higher on measures of procrastination and general psychopathology. In addition, they reported problems in making decisions in a variety of life domains (social, academic, family and everyday). In study 3 Ss who scored high on the Indecisiveness Scale were found to have longer latencies on an experimental decision-making task. The implications of these findings for the nature of indecisiveness were discussed.

INTRODUCTION

Many theorists have linked indecisiveness to obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). In fact, Reed (1977) has gone so far as to state that indecisiveness and doubt “have been stressed as central characteristics of obsessive compulsive disorder by practically every psychiatric authority who has written on the topic” (p. 443). In addition to being related to obsessive compulsive disorder, indecisiveness is one of the DSM-IIIR diagnostic criteria for obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (APA, 1987). Despite this level of prominence, however, we know very little about this construct. Very few empirical studies of indecisiveness exist. Almost all of the work on indecisive- ness has been theoretical or descriptive.

Most theorists have linked indecisiveness to worries about making mistakes. For instance, Straus (1948) believed that indecisiveness among obsessionals was a by-product of the need to do things perfectly. Obsessionals hesitate to act (i.e. are indecisive) because they aren’t certain their actions will be correct or mistake-free. Only if their actions are perfect, that is, not subject to criticism from others, will performance of the act be free of indecision. Salzman (1980) voiced a similar view. To feel safe, obsessionals must perfectly control their environment. Because actions are based on probabilistic judgments of their effects, no one can be absolutely certain of the effect their actions may have. The obsessional will tolerate less of this uncertainty and as a result will postpone or avoid decisions in order to minimize the risk of making a mistake (Salzman, 1980).

Cognitive theorists have noted similar themes regarding perfectionism and indecisiveness. McFall and Wallersheim (1979), along with Beck and Freeman (1990) and Freeman, Pretzer, Fleming and Simon (1990), have suggested that obsessive compulsive disorder and obsessive compulsive personality disorder result from a set of dysfunctional assumptions. Many of these assumptions are similar to what other above mentioned authors have described as perfectionism. For instance, belief in perfect solutions, excessive attempts to avoid mistakes, and equating making a mistake with failure are all aspects of the definition of perfectionism (Frost, Marten, Lahart & Rosenblate, 1990). These assumptions are thought to lead the obsessional to be more cautious about decisions and actions, and to avoid errors of commission. Guidano and Liotti (1983) also emphasize this need for certainty as the core of obsessive compulsive disorder, and suggest that together with perfectionism, it represents the underlying etiology of the disorder.

Beech (Beech, 1971; 1974; Walker and Beech, 1969) developed a theory of obsessive compulsive

*Author for correspondence.

683

684 RANDY 0. FROST and DEANNA L. SHOWS

disorder in which indecisiveness was a central feature. His notion was that obsessive compulsive phenomena comprise post-hoc explanations for excessive alterations of mood. Obsessions and compulsive behavior are simply ways the individual explains his or her mood disturbance. The mood disturbance itself comes about, in part, because of problems in making decisions. Several investigations generated from this theory are among the few to examine decision-making among obsessionals. Liddell (1976, as cited in Rachman and Hodgson, 1980) failed to find any clear differences between obsessional and nonobsessional S s in decision-making problems. On the other hand, Volans (1976) found some evidence of decision-making differences between obsessionals and nonobsessionals, while Milnar, Beech and Walker (197 1) found obsessionals requested repetition of a stimulus prior to making a decision more frequently than nonobsessionals (depressed patients). These studies have been criticized on a number of grounds (see Rachman and Hodgson, 1980) and the support they lend to the hypothesis that indecisiveness is related to OCD is questionable. However, Reed (1985) also reports to have found that obsessionals need more information or clarification before reaching a decision.

Reed (1985) devoted an entire chapter in his book on obsessional experience to indecisiveness. For Reed, indecisiveness is a “formal cognitive characteristic” (Reed, 1977, p. 184) which stems from a problem with the structuring of input. Reed believes that obsessionals overstructure information during input. Consequently their ability to use information is impaired leading to uncertainty and problems with decision making. He suggested indecisiveness in obsessionals should be apparent in slower performance on loosely structured tasks. In support of this hypothesis, he found that obsessionals did worse on a loosely structured, timed cognitive task than nonobsession- als (Reed, 1977). Although it is plausible that the poor performance was due to indecisiveness, without more direct evidence of indecisiveness among the Ss in this study, this conclusion is tenuous.

Reed (1985) makes several observations about the nature of indecisiveness in obsessive compulsive disorder which are important. He notes that in general people are more indecisive about things of great importance to them. Obsessionals, according to Reed, may have a lower threshold for deciding what is important. Since they believe more of their activities are of great importance, they are indecisive about a greater variety of life experiences than the nonobsessional. Reed goes on to suggest that indecisiveness is just the first stage in a 3-stage process which he labels “inconclusiveness”. Stage 2 is the decision to act and the subsequent action. Stage 3 is doubt about the quality of the decision/action. It is this doubting which results in compulsive checking. As Reed (1985) states, “it is not so much decisions that cause difficulties for obsessionals as decisions about decisions” (italics in the original, Reed, 1985, p. 177).

With the exception of Beech’s and Reed’s work, virtually all the work on indecisiveness has been theoretical or descriptive. What empirical work exists on indecisiveness has been limited in scope, criticized on methodological grounds, and has neglected to examine the nature of the construct. For instance, there has been little attention to issues of measurement. The behaviors used to operationalize indecisiveness in the studies by Reed and Beech are unvalidated, and in some cases, it could be argued that they are at best only indirect correlates of the construct. Outside the realm of OCD there have been some attempts to measure “trait indecisiveness”, mostly in the context of vocational decision-making (Cooper, 1986; Cooper, Fuqua and Hartman, 1984; Van Matre and Cooper, 1984). Examination of the items in the scale used in these studies, however, reveals that only 3 out of the 8 items are clearly related to indecisiveness. The other 5 have to do with self-esteem and feeling of helplessness. They have no content reflecting decisional processes. In the context of research on problem solving, D’Zurilla and Nezu (1990) developed Decision Making subscale in their Social Problem Solving Inventory. As of yet, however, few studies have examined the validity of this scale. Frost and Gross (1992) recently reported the use of a measure of indecisiveness in a study of hoarding behavior. One purpose of the present series of studies was to provide additional evidence for the validity of this measure.

Another purpose of the present series of studies was to explore the nature of indecisiveness. Several hypotheses were derived from the literature on indecisiveness and examined in this series of studies. First, indecisiveness should be related to obsessive compulsive phenomena. Most of the theoretical and descriptive literature suggests such a relationship. The limited empirical literature is not so clear, however. Volans’ (1976) findings suggest a relationship between indecisiveness and

Compulsive indecisiveness 685

OCD, while Liddell’s (1976; as described in Rachman and Hodgson, 1980) do not. In this literature there are no descriptions of attempts to measure indecisiveness. Furthermore, the measures investigators have relied on are suspect. Consequently, there are no clear data linking indecisiveness to obsessive compulsive experiences. The type of OCD phenomena indecisiveness will be most closely related to is unclear, although based on Reed’s (1985) suggestion that it is part of a process of inconclusiveness, it might be expected to be most closely related to compulsive checking.

A second hypothesis was that indecisiveness would be correlated with measures of perfectionism. A number of theorists have linked perfectionism to indecisiveness, and most have speculated that indecisiveness is an outgrowth of perfectionistic thinking (Guidano and Liotti, 1983; McFall and Walle~heim, 1979; Salzman, 1980; Straus, 1948). Recent advances in the con~ptuali~tion of perf~tionism have indicated that it is a multi~mensional trait (Frost et af., 1990). Based on the theorizing of these authors, it could be expected that indecisiveness would be most closely related to the Concern Over Mistakes and Doubts About Actions dimensions of perfectionism. These, along with Hewitt and Flett’s Socially Prescribed Perfectionism, form what Frost, Heimberg, Holt, Mattia and Neubauer (1993) call the maladaptive evaluative concern component of perfectionism.

In one recent study Frost and Gross (1992) found a strong correlation between hoarding and indecisiveness and have suggested that it may, in part, explain hoarding behavior. Study 1 provides an opportunity for replication of this finding.

STUDY I

Subjeers

The Ss for study 1 consisted of 112 females who were enrolled in an introductory psychology course at a small private women’s college. The Ss received experimental credit for participation.

Measures

Indecisiveness. To measure this characteristic a 15-item Likert-type questionnaire was devised and tested during an earlier investigation (Frost and Gross, 1993). Each item was in the form of a statement to which Ss indicated the extent to which they agreed or disagreed. Responses were made on a 5-point scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. The 15 items are listed in Table 1. The internal reliability of this scale was good (alpha = 0.87; see Frost and Gross, 1992).

Obsessive ~~mp~~sive behavior. Three scales were used to measure obsessive compulsive behavior. The Maudsley Obsessive Compulsive Inventory (MOCI; Rachman & Hodgson, 1980) is a widely used measure of obsessive compulsive phenomena which has been shown to have validity in nonclinical samples (Frost et al., 1986). It has four subscales: checking, washing, slowness and doubting. The Compulsive Activity Checklist-Revised (CAC-R; Steketee & Freund, 1991) is a 28-item rating scale of the extent to which compulsive behavior interferes with daily life. There are 2 subscales: checking and washing, The Obsessive Thoughts Questionnaire (OTQ) is a 30-item measure of obsessional thinking developed by Bouvard, Mollard, Cottraux and Guerin (1989). The

Table 1. Individual items for the Indecisiveness Scale

1. 1 try to put off making decisions. 2. I always know exactly what I want. 3. I find it easy to make decisions. 4. I have a hard time planning my free time. 5. I like to be in a position to make decisions. 6. Once I make a decision, 1 feel fairly confident that it is a good one. 1. When ordering from a menu, I usually find it difficult to decide what to get. 8. I usually make decisions quickly. 9. Once I make a decision, I stop worrying about it.

10. I become anxious when making a decision. II. I often worry about making the wrong choice. 12. After I have chosen or decided something, I often believe I’ve made the wrong choice or decision. 13. I do not get assignments done on time because I cannot decide what to do first. 14. I have trouble completing assignments because I can’t prioritiu: what is most important. 15. It seems that deciding on the most trivial thing takes me a long time.

Items 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 are reverse scored.

686 RANDY 0. FRUIT and DEANNA L. SHOWS

Ss rate the degree to which each thought troubles them from 0 (does not trouble) to 4 (troubles continuously). This measure has 2 subscales, the first is called perfectionism. The nature of the items in this scale, however, indicate that it is conceptually different from what is measured by the Frost et al. (1993) and Hewitt and Flett (1991) perfectionism scales. The items contain references to contamination and checking (“I think I may be contaminated. ” “Because I am not sure what to do, I have to check more than one time.“). The second subscale of the OTQ is called pathological responsibility.

~er~ct~u~is~. Two questionnaires measured perfectionism, the multidimensional Perf~tionism Scale developed by Frost et al. (1990) and the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale developed by Hewitt and Flett (1991). The Frost et al. (1990) MPS is a 35item questionnaire. In addition to an overall perfectionism score there are five subscales. The Concern over Mistakes subscale reflects negative reactions to mistakes, a tendency to interpret mistakes as equivalent to failure, and a tendency to believe that one will lose the respect of others following failure (e.g. People will probably think less of me if I make a mistake. I should be upset if I make a mistake.). Personal Standards reflects the setting of very high standards and the excessive importance placed on these high standards for self-evaluation (e.g. If I do not set the highest standards for myself, I am likely to end up a second-rate person. I hate being less than the best at things.). The tendency to believe that ones’ parents set very high goals comprised the Parental Expectations Scale (e.g. My parents expected excellence from me. My parents wanted me to be the best at everything.), and the perception that ones’ parents are (or were) overly critical constituted the Parental Criticism Scale (e.g. As a child I was punished for doing things less than perfectly. I never felt like I could meet my parents standards.). Doubting of Actions consisted of items from the Maudsley Obsessive Compulsive Inventory doubting subscale (Rachman and Hodgson, 1980) and reflected the extent to which people doubted their ability to accomplish tasks. A sixth dimension Organization is also included in the scale but not included in the calculation of the total perfectionism score.

The Hewitt and Flett (1991) Scale contains three dimensions: self-oriented perfectionism, other-oriented perfectionism and socially-prescribed perfectionism. Self-Oriented Perfectionism reflects extremely high and unobtainable goals, and the tendency to consider oneself and the task a complete failure when these goals are not met. Other-Oriented Perfectionism involves having perfectionistic goals and expectations for other people, and hostile feelings for the other people when these goals are not met. The feeling that others have set unobtainable goals and expectations for oneself, and the feeling that one must meet these goals in order to gain the others’ approval is Socially-Presc~bed Perfectionism (Hewitt and Flett, 1991).

Hoarding. The Hoarding Scale (referred to in the Ss materials as the Questionnaire on Saving Things) was a 21-item questionnaire designed to measure various aspects of hoarding behavior. The items reflect throwing away behavior, “I have trouble throwing things away.“, emotional reactions to throwing things way, “When I try to throw things away it upsets me emotionally.“, problems with deciding to throw things away, “Sometimes 1 find it hard to decide what to keep and what to throw away.“, infrequent use of saved items, “I have lots of things that I never use.“, concern that discarded items may be needed in the future, “I save certain things because I am scared I may need them after I throw them away.“, and sentimental attachment to possessions, “I see my belongings as extensions of myself, they are part of who I am”. The Ss were asked to respond to each statement on a Likert-type response format from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). This measure has been shown to be a reliable and valid measure of hoarding (Frost and Gross, 1992).

Results and Discussion

The reliability of the Indecisiveness Scale remained high for this sample (alpha = 0.90). Concerning the Maudsley Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory, the Indecisiveness Scale was corre-

lated with the checking and doubting subscales, but not with washing, slowness or the total score (See Table 2). A similar pattern was seen with the CAC-R. Indecisiveness was correlated with checking but not with the washing subscale nor with the total score. Thus it would appear that Indecisiveness is associated with compulsive checking~doubting, but not with compulsive washing, at least among nonclinical subjects. The Obsessive Thoughts Questionnaire revealed positive

Compulsive indecisiveness 687

Table 2. Correlations of the Indecisiveness Scale with Maudsley Obsessive-Compul- sive Inventory, Compulsive Activity Checklist-Revised, and Obsessional Thoughts

Ouestionnaire Subscales

Maudsiey Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory

Checking Washing Slowness Doubting Total

Compulsive Activity Checklist -Revised

Checking Washing Total

Obsessional Thoughts Questionnaire

Perfectionism Pathologic responsibility Total

Indecisiveness Scale

0.411. 0.09 0.02 0.31** 0.07

0.29’. 0.02 0.13

0.24’. 0.29’. 0.26**

l f < 0.05: **p < 0.01.

correlations with the Indecisiveness Scale for both the perfectionism and pathological responsibility subscales and the total OTQ score.

Also as expected, indecisiveness was correlated with the maladaptive evaluative concern dimensions of perfectionism: concern over mistakes, doubts about actions, and socially prescribed perfectionism (See Table 3). It was not correlated with any other dimensions of perfectionism, but it was correlated with Frost et d’s (1990) total perfectionism score. Pilot work on the Indecisiveness Scale suggested that indecisiveness may relate differently to several dimensions of perfectionism. Specifically, indecisiveness was positively correlated with concern over mistakes and negatively correlated with personal standards. Although this was not confirmed with the present data, the Indecisiveness Scale was negatively, though nonsignificantly, correlated with personal standards. To further explore the possibility of a differential relationship between indecisiveness and concern over mistakes and personal standards, two partial correlations were calculated. Indecisiveness was positively and significantly correlated with concern over mistakes when the contribution of personal standards was controlled, r(105) = 0.36, P < 0.001. When the contribution of concern over mistakes was controlled, indecisiveness was significantly and negatively correlated with personal standards, 4105) = -0.29, P c 0.01. Thus it would appear that the Indecisiveness Scale is positively associated with the maladaptive evaluative concern dimensions of perfectionism, and negatively associated with the more positive achievement striving dimensions.

As predicted the Indecisiveness Scale was highly correlated with scores on the Hoarding Scale, r(ll2) = 0.56, P c 0.001. This is consistent with earlier investigations showing a strong correlation between indecisiveness and hoarding (Frost and Gross, 1992).

STUDY 2

Part of the theorizing about indicisiveness and OCD has suggested that obsessionals avoid or postpone decisions, mostly out of a fear of making a mistake and being subject to criticism.

Table 3. Correlations between the Indecisiveness Scale and Dimensions of Perfectionism

Indecisiveness Scale

Frost et al.‘s Multidimensionnl Perfectionism Scale

Concern over mistakes Personal standards Parental expectations Parental criticism Doubts about actions Organization Total

Hewitt and Flett ‘S Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale

Self-oriented perfectionism Socially prescribed perfectionism Other-oriented perfectionism

l P < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

0.23.

-0.12

0.07

0.08

0.55**

0.02

0.20’

-0.01 0.19.

-0.08

688 RANDY 0. FRIXT and DEANNA L. SHOWS

Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that indecisiveness would be related to procrastination. Reed (1985) describes procrastination in a very similar way to indecisiveness. In the literature on procrastination, Solomon and Rothblum (1984) indicate that problems with decision-making are among the reasons for procrastination. Therefore, it was hypothesized in study 2 that highly indecisive individuals would report more problems with procrastination than would more decisive SS.

A second question addressed in study 2 was more general in nature. Are highly indecisive people more likely to experience general symptoms of psychopathology than people who are more decisive? Although from study 1 it appears that indecisiveness is related to compulsivity, the relationship between indecisiveness and general psychopathology is not clear. Indecisiveness has been described as a feature in several accounts of the phenomena of worry (Borkovec, Metzger and Pruzinsky, 1986; Tallis, Eysenck and Mathews, 1991). However, few studies have examined its relationship to general psychopathology. In study 2 indecisive and decisive subjects symptom reports were compared.

Also addressed in study 2 were questions about the nature of indecisiveness. Are people who score high on the Indecisiveness Scale indecisive across different life domains or is their indecisiveness limited to one or two important life areas? For high scorers on the Indecisiveness Scale, how much does indecisiveness bother them and how much does it interfere with their lives? Is there any evidence that indecisiveness is a familial trait? Finally, do highly indecisive people see others as similar to them in their level of indecisiveness? Each of these questions was addressed in study 2.

Method

Subjects

The S s for study 2 were 52 females who were selected from among the S s in study 1. The S s were selected based on their responses to the Indecisiveness Scale. Twenty-seven Ss scored above the 75th percentile on the Indecisiveness Scale, and 25 scored below the 25th percentile. These Ss made up the groups high and low in indecisiveness.

Measures

Procrastination Assessment Scale for Students. (Solomon and Rothblum, 1984). The PASS is a 44-item questionnaire. The first half presents six activities and asks S s to rate the degree to which they procrastinate on each. This section is intended to assess the types of activities in which people procrastinate most frequently. The second half of the questionnaire presents typical reasons for procrastination and asks the Ss to rate the extent to which each reason reflects why they procrastinate. This section is intended to assess whether the Ss procrastinates due to a fear of failure or due to the aversiveness of the task.

Brief Symptom Inventory. In order to measure general psychopathology and psychiatric symptoms, Ss completed a shortened version of the SCL-90, the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI; Derogatis and Melisaratos, 1983). This scale consists of nine primary symptom dimensions and three global indices of distress (general distress-GDI, frequency of symptoms-PST, and intensity of symptoms-PSDI). Subjects are asked to rate how much the physical and emotional symptoms bothered them during the past week on a 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely) scale.

Indecisiveness. A series of questions were devised to further explore the nature of indecisiveness. The Ss were asked to indicate the extent to which they had trouble with decisions in 4 different life domains (social, academic, family, and everyday). Examples of these items are, “I have a hard time choosing what classes to take.” (academic), “I have trouble deciding what to do in my free time.” (social), “I have difficulty deciding how often to call/visit my family” (family), and “I have trouble figuring out how much time I need in the morning to get ready.” (everyday). The S s were also asked how much indecisiveness interferes with the quality of their everyday functioning on a 5-point scale from “not at all” to “very much”, and how much it bothers them when they cannot make up their mind about something. The Ss were asked to indicate the names of 3 friends and to indicate the extent to which they are more or less decisive then each friend on a 7 point scale

Compulsive indecisiveness

Table 4. Decision-making problems in four life-domains bv level of indecisiveness

689

Social Academic Everyday Family

High indecisive 10.4 (2.9) 24.1 (5.4) 24.0 (5.3) 5.4(1.7) Low indecisive 6.5 (2.5) 18.0 (5.6) 15.4 (4.5) 4.3 (1.6) f 5.03 3.84 6.01 2.34 P 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.05

with 1 being more decisive than their friend. Finally, Ss were asked to rate each of their parents on a scale of 1 (very indecisive) to 7 (very decisive).

Results and Discussion

There were significant differences between high and low indecisiveness subjects on the degree to which they procrastinate and the extent to which procrastination is a problem for them. High indecisive Ss reported procrastinating to a greater degree (M = 19.4) than low indecisive subjects (M = 15.5) t (48) = 3.57, P < 0.001. In addition, high indecisive S s reported a greater problem with procrastination (M = 17.6) than low indecisive S s (M = 13.5), t (48) = 3.56, P < 0.001. Interestingly, there was no difference between high and low indecisive Ss on the extent to which procrastination is motivated by a fear of failure (MS = 12.1 and 9.9), I (48) = 1.31, P > 0.05. There was, however, a difference between high and low indecisive Ss on the extent to which task aversiveness was the reason for the procrastination. The S s high in indecisiveness rated task aversiveness as a more likely cause of their procrastination than did subjects low in indecisiveness (MS = 21.0 and 15.6), I (48) = 3.44, P < 0.001.

The S s high in indecisiveness had higher BSI subscale scores on all clinical scales than did subjects low in indecisiveness (all P’s < 0.05). High indecisive S s had larger General Symptom Index scores (M = 54.5) than low indecisiveness Ss (M = 30.1), I (48) = 3.42, P < 0.001. High indecisive subjects also had larger Positive Symptom Total scores (M’s = 26.8 and 16.0, respect- ively), t (48) = 4.23, P < 0.001. Interestingly, S s high in indecisiveness were no different from those low in indecisiveness on the Positive Symptom Distress Index (M’s = 1.92 and 1.72, respectively), t (48) = 1.26, P > 0.05. Thus, although Ss high in indecisiveness S s reported a wider range of symptoms, there were no differences in intensity of symptoms.

There were significant differences between high and low indecisiveness Ss on each domain of decision making problems. The Ss high in indecisiveness reported more problems with social, academic, everyday and family decisions (see Table 4).

The S s high in indecisiveness indicated that indecisiveness interferes with their functioning to a much greater degree than Ss low in indecisiveness (M’s = 3.46 and 1.33, respectively, t (48) = 9.54, P -C O.OOl), and that it bothers them more when they can’t make up their mind than S s low in indecisiveness (M’s = 4.35 and 3.58, respectively, t (48) = 2.89, P < 0.01).

The Ss high in indecisiveness described themselves as significantly more indecisive than their 3 closest friends (M = 13.3) compared to low indecisive subjects (M = 9.9) t (48) = P < 0.001. There were no differences between high and low indecisive Ss on their description of their fathers’ and mothers’ indecisiveness (f’s = 1.58 and 1.44, respectively, P’s > 0.05). The means were in the predicted direction, however.

STUDY 3

Based on the findings of studies 1 and 2 it would appear that indecisiveness can be reliably measured and that the Indecisiveness Scale has some degree of validity. It is correlated with compulsive checking, perfectionism, hoarding, procrastination, and number of symptoms of distress experienced. Also, it is associated with the extent to which Ss found indecisiveness to interfere with life functioning and the extent to which indecisiveness was bothersome.

These findings provide some support for the validity of the Indecisiveness Scale and the utility of the construct of indecisiveness. They represent validity based on self-report, however, and may be subject to distortion and problems with shared method variance. It is important to establish the validity of the Indecisiveness Scale using a behavioral or performance criterion. With a construct like indecisiveness it should be possible to measure difficulties with decision making using

690 RANDY 0. FRUIT and DEANNA L. SHOWS

latency as a criterion. Problems with making decisions should be reflected in the amount of time it takes to make a decision. Study 3 was an attempt to validate the Indecisiveness Scale by comparing high scorers to low scorers on the time it takes them to make a series of decisions. It was predicted that S s who scored high on the Indecisiveness Scale would take longer to make these decisions than Ss who scored low on the Indecisiveness Scale.

Another way to test the validity of the Indecisiveness Scale is to compare it with other measures of the construct. Although few such measures exist, recently D’Zurilla and Nezu (1990) have developed a Decision Making Subscale as part of the Social Problem Solving Inventory. In study 3 Ss scoring high and low on the Indecisiveness Scale were compared using D’Zurilla and Nezu’s (1990) Decision Making Scale.

Subjects

The Ss for study 3 were selected from among a group of 8X female college students who completed a battery of questionnaires including the Indecisiveness Scale used in studies 1 and 2. The Ss above the 75th percentile and below the 25th percentile on the Indecisiveness Scale were contacted and asked to participate. Thirty S s (15 high and 15 low) met the criterion and were used in the study. One of these Ss’ data were discarded due to problems with instructions and completion of the tasks. The final sample included 14 indecisive S s and 15 decisive S s.

Procedures

The S s were brought to the laboratory and seated in a small room which was monitored by a video camera. The Ss were told the experiment had to do with how people make choices about everyday events and that they would be presented with a series of choices. They were instructed to choose between the 2 alternatives given to them and to say their choice out loud. The experimenter instructed the S s via an intercom when to move to the next choice. The experimenter monitored the S s performance on a video display in an adjoining room. The experimenter recorded the latency for each decision/choice.

During trial 1 Ss were presented with 20 pairs of pictures of clothing taken out of popular catalogues. The S s were to say which they would buy if they were deciding between the 2 options. Trial 2 involved presenting 20 pairs of descriptions of courses from the college course catalog. The S s were to say which course they would take if they were deciding between the 2 options. During trial 3 S s were presented with 9 pairs of free time activities and asked which one they would choose. Finally, in trial 4 Ss were presented with 3 different restaurant menus (one at a time) and asked to select an item from the menu that they would order if they were in a restaurant at that time.

Following these 4 trials Ss were asked to complete a post-experimental questionnaire which asked how much difficulty they had with each type of decision in the study (clothing, academic courses, free-time, menu) and how much trouble they have with each of these types of decisions in real life situations. They were asked to respond on a 7-point scale from “no difficulty at all” (1) to “a great deal of difficulty” (7).

As a further attempt to validate this measure of indecisiveness, Ss were asked to complete D’Zurilla and Nezu’s Social Problem-Solving Inventory (D’Zurilla and Nezu, 1990). This inventory has a Decision Making subscale and is one of the few such measures in existence.

The total latency for all decisions was summed and a t-test comparison (one-tailed) of indecisive and decisive S s performed. Indecisive S s took significantly longer (837 seconds) than decisive S s (523 seconds) to make their choices, t (27) = 2.21, P < 0.025.* Indecisive Ss took significantly longer for academic, t (27) = 2.18, P < 0.025, free time, t (27) = 2.47, P < 0.025, menus, t (27) = 2.05, P = 0.025, and clothing, t (27) = 1.77, P < 0.05, decisions.

*The indecisive group had a significantly larger variance for total latency than the decisive group, F(1,27) = 3.97, P < 0.05. To insure that the observed difference was not an artifact of this heterogenaity, a Mann-Whitney U-test was performed. The test revealed a significant difference between the two groups, U = 61 .O, P < 0.05 (one-tailed). Thus the differences in latency observed in the t-test were not due to a violation of the homogenaity of variance assumption.

Compulsive indecisiveness 691

Indecisive Ss reported more difficulties with the decisions in the experiment (M = 13.36) than did decisive S s (M = 10.36, t (26) = 2.65, P c 0.05). They also reported more problems with these types of decisions in real-life situations (M’s = 17.43 and 12.86, respectively, t (26) = 3.19, P < 0.01).

Finally, as predicted, indecisive Ss scored higher on the Social Problem Solving Inventory Decision Making subscale (M = 31.0) than decisive Ss (M = 27.0, t (26) = 2.64, P c O.Ol), indicating more problems with making decisions.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

The findings from these three studies provide evidence for the reliability and validity of the Indecisiveness Scale. The scale has a high internal reliability, it is correlated with other measures as predicted (i.e. perfectionism, hoarding, compulsivity, procrastination) and in an experimental setting Ss who scored high on the Indecisiveness Scale took longer to make a series of decisions than did Ss who scored low on the scale. In addition, Ss with high Indecisiveness Scale scores had higher scores on another measure of decision-making problems than did Ss with low Indecisiveness Scale scores. This measure may prove valuable in the study of compulsive indecisiveness.

These findings also reveal something about the nature of indecisiveness. Consistent with theorizing by Salzman (1980), Straus (1948) and others, indecisiveness was related to perfectionism. Whether indecisiveness is caused by perfectionism, as was suggested by Straus (1948), is not clear from these data. It is important to note, however, that only the maladaptive evaluative concern dimensions of perfectionism were positively correlated with indecisiveness, while at least one of the positive achievement-striving dimensions was negatively correlated. Those who are overly con- cerned with mistakes and who doubt the quality of their actions are people who tend to be indecisive. Those who set high personal standards for themselves and who are not overly concerned with minor mistakes are people who are more decisive.

Also consistent with the literature, indecisiveness was associated with obsessional thoughts and with compulsive checking. This represents the first clear finding linking these two phenomena, particularly in a nonclinical sample. One interesting aspect of these findings is that indecisiveness was associated with compulsive checking, but not with compulsive cleaning. It should be noted, however, that these were Ss nonclinical ones. Although indecisiveness may have a unique association with compulsive checking, it is possible that the compulsive washing subscales used here have little validity for nonclinical samples. These findings need replication with a sample of OCD patients.

Indecisiveness was related to the number of psychopathological symptoms experienced during the last month. Indecisive Ss experienced a greater number of such symptoms, but the average intensity of any given symptom was not different from that of the decisive Ss. Thus, in addition to having more symptoms of compulsivity, they had more general symptoms of psychopathology. There is some additional indication that even in a nonclinical sample such as this one, indecisiveness may be an important problem. The high indecisive Ss indicated that their indecisiveness bothers them, and interferes with their ability to function to a much greater extent than the decisive Ss.

Interestingly, indecisive Ss did not rate their parents as being more indecisive than did the decisive Ss. If indecisiveness were a familial characteristic or learned through modeling, such a difference would have been expected. This finding suggests that indecisiveness is not a result of any direct familial transmission. Indecisive S s did rate themselves as more indecisive than their friends which indicates that they see this as a characteristic which sets them apart.

As expected Indecisiveness Scale scores were highly correlated with the Hoarding Scale. This is consistent with Frost and Gross’ (1992) suggestion that hoarding is in large part a problem of indecision about future need and about the cost of discarding a possession which may be needed later. As expected, both the degree of procrastination and the extent to which procrastination is a problem were correlated with indecisiveness. Postponing responsibilities may, at least in part, reflect an inability to make decisions about how to accomplish tasks. Interestingly, indecisiveness was not associated with fear of failure as a reason for procrastination. This is somewhat unexpected given the assumption that problems in decision-making come about because of a concern over

692 RANDY 0. FRCI~T and DEANNA L. SHOWS

making mistakes. Indecisive S s felt the reason for their procrastination was due to the aversiveness of the task moreso than decisive Ss. The exact nature of this aversiveness was unclear.

The Indecisiveness Scale appears to measure a general phenomena which cuts across most life areas. In study 2 indecisive Ss reported being indecisive in all 4 life domains tapped (social, academic, family and everyday). They reported decision making problems both in and outside the experimental setting for the choice tasks in study 3 (clothes, classes, free time and menus). Also in study 3, they had longer latencies to decision making in these tasks. Further research on the nature of indecisiveness is warranted.

REFERENCES

American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd revised Edn). Washngton, DC: APA.

Beck, A. T. & Freeman, A. (1990). Cognitive Therapy of Personality Disorders. New York: Guilford Press. Beech, H. R. (1971). Ritualistic activity in obsessional patients. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 15, 417422. Beech, H. R. (1974). Obsessional States. London: Methuen’s Manuals of Psychology. Borkovec, T. D., Metzger, R. L. & Pruzinsky, T. (1986). Anxiety, worry, and the self. In Hartman, L. M. & Blankstein,

K. R. (Eds), Perception of Self in Emotional Disorder and Psychopathology. New York: Plenum. Bouvard, M., Mollard, E., Cottraux, J. & Guerin, J. (1989). Etude preliminaire d’une liste de pensees obsedantes.

L’Encephale, 15, 351-354. Cooper, S. E. (1986). The effects of group and individual vocational counseling on career indecision and personal

indecisiveness. Journal of College Student Personnel, 27, 3942. Cooper, S. E., Fuqua, D. R. & Hartman, B. W. (1984). The relationship of trait indecisiveness to vocational uncertainty,

career indecision, and interpersonal characteristics. Journal of College Sfuaknt Personnel, 25, 3533356. Derogatis, L. R. & Meliseratos, N. (1983). The Brief Symptom Inventory: An introductory report. Psychological Medicine,

13, 595605. D’Zurilla, T. J. & Nezu, A. M. (1990). Development and preliminary evaluation of the Social Problem-Solving Inventory.

Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2, 156163. Freeman, A., Pretzer, J., Fleming, B. & Simon, K. (1990). Clinical Applications of Cognitive Therapy. New York: Plenum. Frost, R. 0. & Gross, R. C. (1993). The hoarding of possessions. Eehaviour Research and Therapy, 31, 367-381. Frost, R. 0.. Sher, K. & Geen, T. (1986). Psychopathology and personality characteristics of nonclinical compulsive

checkers. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 24, 133-143. Frost, R. O., Marten, P., Lahart, C. & Rosenblate, R. (1990). The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognitive Therapy and

Research, 14, 449468. Frost, R. O., Heimberg, R. G., Holt, C. S., Mattia, J. I. & Neubauer, A. (1993). A comparison of two measures of

perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 119-126 Guidano, V. & Liotti, G. (1983). Cognitive Processes and Emotional Disorders. New York: Guilford Press. Hewitt, P. L. & Flett, G. L. (1991). Perfectionism in the self and social contexts: Conceptualization, assessment, and

association with psychopathology. Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 456470. McFall, M. E. & Wollersheim, J. P. (1979). Obsessive-compulsive neurosis: a cognitive-behavioral formulation and

approach to treatment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 3, 333-348. Milnar, A., Beech, H. R. & Walker, V. J. (1971). Decision processes and obsessional behavior. British Journal of Social

and Clinical Psychology, IO, 88-89. Rachman, S. J. & Hodgson, R. J. (1980). Obsessions and Compulsions. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Reed, G. F. (1976). Indecisiveness in obsessional-compulsive disorder. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,

15, 443445. Reed, G. F. (1977). Obsessional cognition: performance on two numerical tasks. British Journal of Psychiatry, 130, 184185. Reed, G. F. (1985). Obsessional experience and compulsive behavior: A cognitive-structural approach. New York: Academic

Press. Salzman, L. (1980). Treatment of the Obsessiue Personality. New York: Jason Aronson. Solomon, L. J. & Rothblum, E. D. (1984). Academic procrastination: frequency and cognitive-behavioral correlates. Journal

of Counseling Psychology, 31, 503-509. Steketee, G. & Freund, B. (1991). Psychometric properties of the compulsive activity checklist. Unpublished manuscript. Straus, E. W. (1948). On obsession: a clinical and methodological study. New York: Nervous and Mental Disease

Monographs, No. 73. Tallis, F., Eysenck, M. W. & Mathews, A. (1991). Worry: a critical analysis and some theoretical approaches. Anxiety

Research, 4, 97-108. Van Matre, G. & Cooper, S. E. (1984). Concurrent evaluation of career indecision and indecisiveness. Personnel and

Guidance Journal, 62, 637-639. Volans, P. J. (1976). Styles of decision-making and probability appraisal in selected obsessional and phobic patients. Brirish

Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 305-317. Walker, V. J. & Beech, H. R. (1969). Mood state and the ritualistic behavior of obsessional patients. British Journal of

Psychiatry, 115, 1261-1263.

本文献由“学霸图书馆-文献云下载”收集自网络，仅供学习交流使用。

学霸图书馆（www.xuebalib.com）是一个“整合众多图书馆数据库资源，

提供一站式文献检索和下载服务”的24 小时在线不限IP

图书馆。

图书馆致力于便利、促进学习与科研，提供最强文献下载服务。

图书馆导航：

图书馆首页 文献云下载 图书馆入口 外文数据库大全 疑难文献辅助工具