Investigation of the Relationship Between Family Accommodation, Alexithymia, and Emotional Regulation Difficulty in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Fatma Kartal; Hatice Polat; Aydın Kurt

doi:10.30773/pi.2025.0232

Psychiatry Investig > Volume 22(12); 2025 > Article

Kartal, Polat, and Kurt: Investigation of the Relationship Between Family Accommodation, Alexithymia, and Emotional Regulation Difficulty in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Original Article

Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(12):1368-1378.

Published online: December 4, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2025.0232

Investigation of the Relationship Between Family Accommodation, Alexithymia, and Emotional Regulation Difficulty in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Fatma Kartal¹

, Hatice Polat²

, Aydın Kurt³

¹Department of Psychiatry, Kırıkkale University, Faculty of Medicine, Kırıkkale, Türkiye

²Department of Gerontology, Malatya Turgut Özal University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Malatya, Türkiye

³Department of Psychiatry, Niğde Ömer Halisdemir University, Faculty of Medicine, Niğde, Türkiye

Correspondence: Fatma Kartal, MD, PhD Department of Psychiatry, Kırıkkale University, Faculty of Medicine, Yenişehir Ankara Road 7th km. Kırıkkale University Campus, Yahşihan/Kırıkkale 71450, Türkiye Tel: +90-5421863611, E-mail: fatonkartal@gmail.com

Received July 8, 2025 Revised September 10, 2025 Accepted September 24, 2025

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the study is to explore the relationship between family accommodation, emotion regulation difficulties, and alexithymia in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).

Methods

The study group consisted of 107 individuals diagnosed with OCD, while the control group included 151 healthy individuals. Sociodemographic data form, Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), Family Accommodation Scale-Patient Version (FASPV), Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), and Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) were used to collect data.

Results

In our study, it was found that the median DERS and TAS scores of the participants were significantly higher in the OCD group than in the control group. A moderate positive correlation was found between FAS-PV and the total score of YBOCS (p=0.002, r=0.302). Statistically significant, low to moderate, positive correlations were observed between FAS-PV and the total score of DERS (p=0.001, r=0.319). Furthermore, a statistically significant, moderate to low correlation was found between YBOCS and the total score of DERS. A positive and substantial influence on FAS-PV is provided by the YBOCS variable (B=0.571, p=0.01).

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study found that difficulty in emotion regulation and alexithymia levels were higher in individuals with OCD compared to healthy controls, and that family accommodation was related to both difficulties in emotion regulation and alexithymia. Finally, it was determined that difficulty in emotion regulation has a mediating effect in the relationship between family accommodation and alexithymia. It is suggested that longitudinal studies be conducted to further support the data presented by this study.

Keywords: Alexithymia, Emotion regulation, Family accomodation, Obsessive compulsive disorder

INTRODUCTION

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is defined by intrusive, unwanted thoughts, images, or urges that cause significant distress, accompanied by repetitive behavioral or mental actions aimed at alleviating this discomfort [1]. As a heterogeneous condition, OCD encompasses various themes, including contamination, order and symmetry, doubt and checking, and unacceptable or distressing thoughts [2]. The symptoms of OCD not only affect individuals directly but also impact their family relationships. In turn, the family environment can significantly influence the progression and manifestation of OCD symptoms [3]. Family accommodation describes the modifications family members make to their daily routines or their participation in the patient’s rituals to minimize or prevent anxiety in individuals with OCD [4]. Research indicates that up to 99% of family members of individuals with OCD engage in at least one form of family accommodation, often on a daily basis [5]. Family accommodation plays a critical role in symptom persistence and recovery, with higher levels of family accommodation linked to greater OCD symptom severity and poorer treatment outcomes [5]. Moreover, family members’ understanding of and reactions to psychiatric illnesses strongly affect treatment-seeking behaviors and therapeutic outcomes [6].

One factor influencing treatment response in psychiatric disorders is alexithymia [2], a personality trait characterized by difficulty in recognizing and expressing emotions. Alexithymia has been closely associated with OCD [7], with research consistently demonstrating that individuals with OCD tend to exhibit higher levels of alexithymia [8-10]. Similarly, Üstündağ and Şen Gökçeimam [11] (2020) observed that OCD patients often face challenges in identifying and articulating their emotions. Alexithymia has significant implications for emotional regulation [11]; as difficulties in recognizing and expressing emotions can hinder the ability to manage emotions effectively, particularly in stressful situations [10]. Emotional regulation difficulty refers to challenges in managing impulsive behaviors triggered by negative emotions, sustaining goal-directed actions, and employing adaptive emotional regulation strategies [12-14]. A key element in managing negative emotions is the ability to identify and express them effectively [15]. When individuals fail to understand their emotional experiences, these emotions may appear more threatening and overwhelming [15]. For individuals with OCD, distinguishing imagined mental events from reality is often problematic, exacerbating the distress caused by intrusive thoughts and reinforcing the perception that these thoughts are closely tied to reality [10]. Aldao and Nolen-Hoeksema [16] (2011) observed that poorly regulated emotions can lead to compulsive behaviors aimed at escaping or alleviating such distress. Emotional hypersensitivity, coupled with a tendency to reject or avoid emotions, often results in avoidance of emotionally charged situations and reliance on compulsive behaviors or reassurance-seeking strategies to manage negative emotions. These patterns can significantly influence the severity of compulsions, treatment-seeking behaviors, and treatment outcomes in individuals with OCD. Recognizing emotional regulation difficulties and their contributing factors is therefore essential for effective intervention and support.

A review of the literature indicates an absence of studies exploring the relationship between family accommodation, emotional regulation difficulties, and alexithymia in OCD. To address this gap, the present study aims to explore the interplay among these variables in individuals diagnosed with OCD. Specifically, it hypothesizes that OCD patients with higher levels of alexithymia are likely to experience greater difficulties in emotional regulation. Additionally, the study seeks to examine the relationships between family accommodation, emotional regulation difficulties, alexithymia, and OCD severity. Our research aims to answer the following questions in line with our hypotheses: 1) Is family accommodation related to emotion regulation difficulties and alexithymia levels in individuals with OCD? 2) Is there a predictive effect of OCS, emotion regulation difficulties, and alexithymia levels on family accommodation in OCD? 3) Is there a mediating effect of emotion regulation difficulties in the relationship between family accommodation and alexithymia?

METHODS

Sample

The sample for this study was drawn from individuals who visited the psychiatry outpatient clinic of a training and research hospital in Türkiye’s Central Anatolia region between December 2023 and December 2024. Patients who applied to the psychiatry outpatient clinic and were diagnosed with OCD according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) [1] based on the evaluation of a psychiatrist and who did not meet the diagnosis of another psychiatric disorder according to DSM-5 were included in the study. The control group consisted of healthy individuals matched to the OCD group in terms of age and gender. A theoretical power analysis, using an independent samples t-test, indicated that a minimum sample size of 200 participants (100 per group) would be required to achieve a test power of 0.8 (1-β), an effect size (ES) of 0.62, and a Type 1 error rate (alpha) of 0.0515. Scales were administered to 120 patients diagnosed with OCD by a psychiatrist, all of whom agreed to participate in the study. However, 13 patients were excluded due to incomplete responses on the data collection forms. The final sample consisted of 107 individuals with OCD and 151 healthy controls, with the control group comprising hospital staff and their relatives.

Both groups comprised literate individuals aged 18-65 years, with no additional psychiatric conditions. For the OCD group, inclusion required a diagnosis of OCD based on DSM-5 criteria, while the control group consisted of individuals without any psychiatric diagnoses. Before the implementation phase of the study, participants underwent psychiatric evaluations, and those not meeting the inclusion criteria were excluded. The exclusion criteria included: any neurological or psychiatric conditions that could interfere with answering the questions, comorbid conditions (e.g., psychotic disorders, bipolar disorder, mood disorders, substance dependency), organic or mental issues that could hinder understanding or completing the scales, age outside the 18-65 years range, and refusal to participate. Additionally, since family accommodation was a key aspect of this study, individuals living alone were excluded.

Procedure

Participants were informed that their identities and personal data collected during the study would remain confidential and that they could withdraw at any time. The research was conducted between December 2023 and December 2024 at a psychiatry outpatient clinic in a training and research hospital in Türkiye’s Central Anatolia region. Data were collected by a psychiatrist working at this institution through face-to-face interviews, which lasted approximately 20-25 minutes. Prior to the study, participants were informed of its purpose, and both written and verbal consent were obtained.

Data collection tools

The researchers used a sociodemographic data form along with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), Family Accommodation Scale-Patient Version (FAS-PV), Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS), and Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS).

Sociodemographic data form

This form, created by the researchers, contained information about the sociodemographic attributes of the participants.

YBOCS

This is a scale developed to rate the quality and severity of obsessive-compulsive symptoms (OCS) [17,18]. YBOCS is an interviewer-administered scale. It consists of a total of 19 items, but only the first 10 items are used to determine the total score. The first five items evaluate obsessions, and items 6-10 evaluate compulsions. The score of each item varies between 0 and 4, with the total score ranging from 0 to 40. Karamustafalıoğlu et al. [19] adapted the scale to Turkish and performed the validity and reliability. The original study reported the Cronbach’s alpha value of the scale to be 0.98, and we determined it to be 0.91 in the current study.

FAS-PV

Wu et al. [20] developed the FAS, and Çöldür [21] performed the validity and reliability analyses of the Turkish version of this scale. In this scale, the respondent is the individual with OCD. The scale provides information about patient symptoms and family members’ accommodation of and involvement in symptoms. The first part of the FAS consists of an OCD symptom checklist, and the second part consists of 19 items evaluating the frequency of the accommodation behaviors of family members. In the second part, the frequency of such behaviors is also measured with a five-point Likert type evaluation. The total score is calculated by adding up the scores of 19 items in the second part. FAS has four subscales: direct participation in and facilitation of OCD symptoms; avoidance of OCD triggers; assuming patient’s responsibilities; and modifying personal responsibilities. The Cronbach alpha value for the entire scale was 0.89 in the original study and 0.89 in the current study.

TAS

This 20-item scale developed by Bagby et al. [22,23] in 1994 was adapted to Turkish by Güleç et al. [24]. It is a 5-point Likert type scale (1=Never to 5=Always). The participant marks the extent each item describes him/herself. The scale includes three alexithymia sub-dimensions: “difficulty to recognize emotions (TAS-A),” “difficulty to express emotions (TAS-B),” and “extraverted thinking (TAS-C).” Certain scale items are scored in reverse. The total Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the scale was determined as 0.78. The Cronbach’s alpha value of this study is 0.91.

DERS

The DERS is a self-report scale developed by Gratz and Roemer [13] in 2004 to examine difficulties in emotion regulation across four dimensions. The scale consists of 36 items scored from 1 to 5 and includes six sub-scales: nonacceptance of emotional responses, difficulty engaging in goal-directed behavior, impulse control difficulties, lack of emotional awareness, limited access to emotion regulation strategies, and lack of emotional clarity. Higher scores indicate greater difficulties in these areas. The Turkish validity and reliability study of the scale was conducted by Ruganci and Gençöz [25], who reported a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.94. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was found to be 0.95.

Biostatistical data analysis

Qualitative variables were summarized by calculating frequency (percentage). Pearson’s chi-square test, Yates continuity correction test, and Fisher’s exact test were used where appropriate to examine the associations of qualitative variables with patient and healthy groups. The Shapiro-Wilk (W) test was used to examine whether the quantitative variables were normally distributed. Variables that were not normally distributed were summarized with median (interquartile range [IQR]) values using the Mann-Whitney U test statistic and the ES was given. In multiple regression analysis, the relationship between independent variables was examined with the backward elimination model; direct or indirect effects of the relationship between variables were examined by mediator analysis. In all results, p≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS version 26.0 package program (IBM Corp.).

Ethics approval

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Nigde Omer Halisdemir University Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee (protocol number: 2023/109, dated 18/11/2023), and necessary permissions were secured from all relevant institutions. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Helsinki Declaration.

RESULTS

In Table 1, the differences between the groups were examined by comparing the clinical and demographic characteristics of the group of OCD group and control group. The significant differences were found level in categories such as number of cohabitants, marital status, educational level, and prevalence of mental disorder in the family (p-values for all variables are <0.01). These data show how similar the sex and age characteristics are for both groups. There is no significant difference in the age variable according to sex in the OCD group and healthy control group.

The median scores for the scales used are shown in Table 2. The OCD group has a median score of 26 for both FAS-PV and YBOCS. When comparing the median scores of the OCD and Control groups on the DERS and TAS, it was found that all subscale and total scores on both scales were significantly higher in the OCD group than in the control group.

The correlation matrix for the scales used in the OCD group is shown in Table 3. A moderate positive correlation was found between FAS-PV and the total score of YBOCS (p=0.002, r=0.302). Statistically significant, low to moderate, positive correlations were observed between FAS-PV and the total score of DERS, as well as the Non-Acceptance, Strategy, Impulse, and Goal subscale scores (r and p-values, respectively: r=0.319, p=0.001; r=0.334, p<0.001; r=0.362, p<0.001; r=0.240, p=0.013; r=0.218, p=0.024). A statistically significant, moderate to low positive relationship was found between FAS-PV and TAS-total, as well as the TAS-A and TAS-B subscale scores (r and p-values, respectively: r=0.267, p=0.005; r=0.276, p=0.004; r=0.302, p=0.002). Furthermore, a statistically significant, moderate to low correlation was found between YBOCS and the total score of DERS, as well as the Non-Acceptance, Strategy, Impulse, and Goal subscale scores (r and p-values, respectively: r=0.324, p=0.001; r=0.373, p<0.001; r=0.442, p=0.001; r=0.300, p=0.002; r=0.216, p=0.026). A statistically significant positive correlation was also found between YBOCS and the total score of TAS, as well as the TAS-A and TAS-B subscale scores (r and p-values, respectively: r=0.248, p=0.01; r=0.338, p<0.01; r=0.224, p=0.02).

The findings of the regression study with the backward elimination model, one of the regression stepwise models, to determine the factors affecting FAS-PV are shown in Table 4. FAS-PV was examined in the first model as a function of the variables YBOCS, DERS-total, and TAS-total. A positive and substantial influence on FAS-PV is provided by the YBOCS variable (B=0.571, p=0.01). As a result, FAS-PV increases by 0.571 units for every unit that the YBOCS score increases. It was determined that the DERS-total (B=0.13, p=0.085). FASPV was not significantly impacted by the TAS-total variable (B=0.067, p=0.701). The model’s overall significance was statistically significant according to F=6.866 and p<0.001. The second model showed a higher impact on FAS-PV from the YBOCS and DERS-total variables. Consistent with the first model, YBOCS continued to have a positive and significant impact (B=0.576, p=0.009). In this model, the DERS-total variable also showed significance and had a favourable effect on FAS-PV (B=0.148, p=0.012). The second model had a high overall significance and was statistically significant at the F=10.309, p<0.001. Additionally, Table 4 shows that the Tolerance values for all variables vary between 0.54 and 0.881, and the variance inflation factor (VIF) values range between 1.135 and 1.854. The findings demonstrate the absence of multicollinearity in the regression model. Per the interpretation guidelines, Tolerance values under 0.1 signify a significant presence of multicollinearity, values under 0.2 imply a possible concern, whereas VIF values below 5 typically denote no issue, values ranging from 5 to 10 necessitate caution, and values exceeding 10 indicate a severe multicollinearity problem [26]. As a result, the Tolerance and VIF values for the variables in this research are within acceptable bounds, and the regression model fulfills the criterion of no multicollinearity. YBOCS and DERStotal factors are significant predictors of FAS-PV, according to these findings.

The statistical significance of the effects of TAS-total on FAS-PV was evaluated using the p-values in Table 5. First, the p-value for the overall effect of TAS-total on FAS-PV was 0.008. According to the 95% confidence interval, the p-value indicates that the effect of TAS-total on FAS-PV is statistically significant and positive. It is noteworthy that the p-value of 0.595 for the direct effect is significantly higher than the significance level (usually p<0.05). As a result, family cohesion is not statistically influenced in a way that would allow TAS-total to work directly. When the ES data are evaluated, the ES value of the direct effect is 0.9570, but the ES value of the overall effect is 0.3718. This indicates that the overall effect may be affected more by indirect effects. In the study of indirect effects, the indirect effect with the ES value of 0.2761 and the confidence interval of 0.0251-0.5439 is determined by using the DERS-total mediator variable. To evaluate the stability and dependability of the indirect impact, the BootSE of the indirect effect is 0.1314. Additionally, the BootSE of 0.0885 and ES of 0.1882 are recorded for the completely standardized indirect effect. Based on the mediator variable DERS-total, these findings imply that the indirect impact is a considerable part of the effect of TAS-total on FAS-PV and is also statistically significant. So, it can be concluded that this mediating variable plays a secondary role in the majority of the overall impact of TAS-total on FAS-PV.

DISCUSSION

When examining the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of this study, we found that the healthy control group and individuals diagnosed with OCD were matched in terms of age and sex, with a higher proportion of female participants in both groups compared to males. The literature suggests that individuals diagnosed with OCD are typically in the young-to-middle adulthood stage, and that OCD is more prevalent in females than in males [27]. Therefore, study sample aligns with the literature in terms of age and sex distribution related to OCD prevalence [28,29]. Additionally, in our sample, the OCD group was found to have a lower level of education, a higher proportion of married participants, and a greater number of individuals living in nuclear families compared to the control group. Since the aim of this study was to evaluate family accommodation in OCD, individuals living alone were specifically excluded from the research. The difference in the proportion of cohabiting individuals between the groups is likely due to the higher number of married individuals in the OCD group, which resulted in a greater number of individuals living in nuclear families compared to the control group. A review of the literature shows that in Türkiye, the marriage rate among individuals diagnosed with OCD is typically higher than the rate of single individuals, with about two-thirds of those diagnosed being married [26]. Although the OCD group in this study had a higher proportion of married participants compared to the control group, the rate was lower than what is reported in the literature, which can likely be attributed to the younger average age of our sample.

In this study, the median value for FAS-PV in the OCD group was found to be 26. A moderate positive correlation was found between family accommodation and the level of OCS. Previous studies have shown that family accommodation scores tend to be lower [21,30,31]. One possible explanation for this difference is that we excluded individuals with OCD who live alone from our sample. A study conducted in China reported that a family-centered structure resulted in higher family accommodation [32]. Previous research has frequently reported a relationship between OCS levels and family accommodation, and our findings are consistent with the literature [4,33-35]. Mowrer’s two-stage theory [36] of fear and avoidance helps explain the observed results in OCD. According to this theory, obsessive fears become distressing when a neutral stimulus is associated with an unpleasant or traumatic experience (classical conditioning). In the second stage, any behavior that alleviates this obsessive fear can become habitual due to negative reinforcement, effectively reducing anxiety (operant conditioning) [3]. From Mowrer’s perspective, it can be concluded that family harmony strengthens operant conditioning, which may explain the observed increase in OCD symptoms. It is believed that as the severity of OCD symptoms increases, family members’ feelings of wanting to help intensify, which may result in the symptoms being more prominently exhibited [35]. Therefore, family accommodation is an important factor that can prevent the patient from being overwhelmed by the illness and witnessing its consequences, thereby contributing to the continuation or exacerbation of the disorder.

In this study, we found that difficulty in emotion regulation and alexithymia levels in the OCD group were positively correlated with the level of OCS and were statistically significantly higher compared to the control group. Similar findings have been reported in studies examining alexithymia levels and difficulty in emotion regulation in individuals diagnosed with OCD [7,9,37-39]. In contrast, this study investigated the relationship between family accommodation, alexithymia, and difficulty in emotion regulation in OCD and found a statistically significant positive relationship between family accommodation and both emotion regulation difficulty and alexithymia. Specifically, as family accommodation increased in OCD, patients exhibited more alexithymic traits and greater difficulty in regulating their emotions. It is known that family accommodation can help avoid anxiety-inducing stimuli or situations [5]. However, family accommodation may also indirectly reinforce irrational obsessive thoughts or the belief that a relative cannot cope with the distress caused by these thoughts. Furthermore, it has been reported that individuals with OCD who experience high family accommodation have fewer opportunities to apply self-regulation or coping skills [5]. A study conducted on adolescents with OCD found that family accommodation, as a parenting substyle, was higher in parents of adolescents with poor emotion control [40]. It was observed that parents of adolescents with OCD exhibited pathological levels of approval behaviors to reduce OCD-related stress in their children and more frequently adjusted their routines to accommodate this distress, often relying on family accommodation [41]. Similarly, as seen in alexithymia, difficulty in identifying and labeling emotions can lead individuals to develop more concrete and understandable ways of coping [7]. Therefore, the regulatory actions taken by families can increase patients’ difficulty in identifying and expressing their emotions, prevent the development of emotion regulation skills, and hinder their ability to tolerate stress.

In the first regression model established within the study to identify the factors affecting family accommodation, family accommodation was examined as a function of OCS, difficulty in emotion regulation, and alexithymia. It was found that as the OCS level increased, family accommodation increased by 0.571 units. Although difficulty in emotion regulation did not have a statistically significant effect on family accommodation, it showed a borderline significant effect. In the second model, both OCS level and difficulty in emotion regulation were found to have a stronger impact on family accommodation. Consistent with the first model, the second model also showed that OCS level continued to have a positive and significant effect. Additionally, in this model, difficulty in emotion regulation was found to be statistically significant. According to the results of the regression analysis, OCS level and difficulty in emotion regulation are significant predictors of family accommodation. The finding that OCS level predicts family accommodation is frequently reported in the literature [35,42], making it an expected result. Emotion regulation is not only an individual process but can also be supported or hindered through interactions with close others, including family members [43,44]. More specifically, some individuals learn to rely on themselves first to reduce distress, while others turn to others for help in regulating their emotions [45]. Therefore, identifying the significant predictive effect of difficulty in emotion regulation, along with OCS level, on family accommodation in OCD is important. In this context, the predictive effect of difficulty in emotion regulation on family accommodation, alongside OCS level, provides valuable insight into how interpersonal processes contribute to the maintenance of psychopathology. Additionally, one of the significant findings of the study is related to the effects of alexithymia on family accommodation. It was found that the overall effect of alexithymia on family accommodation is significant, with indirect effects playing a more prominent role. In the relationship between family accommodation and alexithymia, difficulty in emotion regulation was found to have a mediating effect. Therefore, it can be concluded that difficulty in emotion regulation plays a secondary role in the overall effect of alexithymia on family accommodation.

Limitations

This study has several limitations. One limitation is that we did not examine the effect of the traditional societal structure in our region on family accommodation. Additionally, the fact that this study was conducted in a single center and had a cross-sectional design is other limitations. Previous studies have reported that family accommodation is variably related to the subdimensions of OCD symptoms [3] and not evaluating these subdimensions in our study is an important limitation. Another limitation is the use of the self-report scale FAS-PV to assess family accommodation. In addition, our findings regarding sociodemographic data were discussed in the first paragraph of the discussion, but the fact that characteristics such as education level and marital status differ between groups is also among our limitations. In this study, we specifically excluded individuals living alone in order to evaluate family accommodation, but this can be considered a limitation considering that it can be perceived as selection bias. Additionally, our sample did not demonstrate homogeneity in terms of medical treatment status. The decrease in both OCS and emotion regulation difficulties with medical treatment may have also led to a change in family accommodation. Therefore, the lack of homogeneity in the patient group in terms of medical treatment status can be considered a limitation. The cross-sectional design of our study can be considered a limitation in terms of causal determination.

In conclusion, these research results are significant because it is one of the first to examine the relationship between family accommodation, emotion regulation difficulties, and alexithymia, which has recently been emphasized as important in OCD and suggested for inclusion in the diagnostic criteria [5]. This study found that levels of family accommodation, emotion regulation difficulties, and alexithymia were higher in individuals with OCD compared to healthy controls, and that family accommodation was associated with both emotion regulation difficulties and alexithymia. One of our key findings is the determination that, beyond OCD level, emotion regulation difficulties have a predictive effect on family accommodation. Finally, emotion regulation difficulties were found to mediate effect in the relationship between family accommodation and alexithymia. We believe that our findings regarding family accommodation in OCD may contribute to therapeutic interventions that can impact recovery during the treatment process. Indeed, while integrating the family into OCD treatment is a standard practice in children, treatment processes are generally conducted independently of the family in the adult population [46]. However, we emphasize that treatment goals should include teaching family members the basic principles of behavior management (including how to ignore undesirable behaviors and attend to more desirable ones)—that is, how to cope with symptoms—rather than simply adapting to symptoms. We emphasize that a decrease in family accommodation may strengthen positive cognitive, behavioral, and physiological strategies associated with emotion regulation and reduce negative cognitive, behavioral, and physiological strategies underlying emotion dysregulation. It is suggested that longitudinal studies be conducted to further support the data presented by this study.

Notes

Availability of Data and Material

The datasets generated or analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: all authors. Data curation: Fatma Kartal, Aydın Kurt. Formal analysis: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Funding: all authors. Investigation: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Methodology: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Project administration: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Resources: all authors. Software: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Supervision: all authors. Validation: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Visualization: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Writing— original draft: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat. Writing—review & editing: Fatma Kartal, Hatice Polat.

Funding Statement

None

Acknowledgments

None

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics on demographic and clinical characteristics of OCD and control group

Variables	Categories	OCD group	Control group	Test and significance
Age (yr)	Male (mean)	27.59	27.92	0.618^§
Age (yr)	Female (mean)	29.20	28.06
Sex	Male	27 (25.2)	39 (25.8)	χ²=0.012,
Sex	Female	80 (74.8)	112 (74.2)	p=0.914^*
Education status	Primary school	24 (22.4)	2 (1.3)	χ²=30.998,
	High school	31 (29.0)	51 (33.8)	p<0.001^*
	University	52 (48.6)	98 (64.9)
Marital status	Single	62 (57.9)	121 (80.1)	χ²=14.953,
Marital status	Married	45 (42.1)	30 (19.9)	p<0.001^*
Employment status	Unemployment	80 (74.8)	102 (67.5)	χ²=1.570,
Employment status	Employment	27 (25.2)	49 (32.5)	p=0.210^*
Place of residence	Province center	88 (82.2)	129 (85.4)	χ²=0.476,
Place of residence	District or smaller area	19 (17.8)	22 (14.6)	p=0.490^*
People he/she lives with	Alone	0	0	χ²=32.004,
	With a family member	18 (16.8)	77 (51.0)	p<0.001^*
	Nuclear family	83 (77.6)	71 (47.0)
	Extended family	6 (5.6)	3 (2.0)
Mental disorder in the family	Absent	88 (82.2)	146 (96.7)	χ²=15.498,
Mental disorder in the family	Present	19 (17.8)	5 (3.3)	p<0.001^†
Smoking	Non-smokers	91 (85.0)	133 (88.1)	χ²=0.503,
Smoking	Smokers	16 (15.0)	18 (11.9)	p=0.596^‡
Alcohol consumption	Absent	107 (100)	149 (98.7)	χ²=0.225,
Alcohol consumption	Present	0	2 (1.3)	p=0.635^†
Psychopharmacological treatment used	Absent	58 (54.2)	151 (100)	χ²=85.362,
Psychopharmacological treatment used	Present	49 (45.8)	0	p=0.490^*
Treatment compliance	Absent	54 (50.5)	151 (100)	χ²=94.131,
Treatment compliance	Present	53 (49.5)	0	p<0.001^†
History of psychiatric hospitalization	Absent	100 (93.5)	151 (100)	χ²=10.154,
History of psychiatric hospitalization	Present	7 (6.5)	0	p=0.002^†

Values are presented as number only or number (%). p<0.05 indicates significance.

^* Pearson chi-square test;

^† Fisher’s exact test;

^‡ continuity correction;

^§ Mann-Whitney U test.

OCD, obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Table 2.

Mean FAS-PV and YBOCS scores of individuals diagnosed with OCD and comparison of the mean DERS and TAS scores of the groups

Variables	OCD group		Control group		p	ES
Variables	Median (IQR)	95% CI	Median (IQR)	95% CI	p	ES
DERS
Fawareness	17 (7)	26-28	15 (5)	21-25	0.01^*	0.325
Clarity	13 (6)	21-25	10 (5)	16-21	<0.001^*	0.553
Non-Acceptance	16 (11)	26-30	11 (7)	19-28	<0.001^*	0.761
Strategy	23 (15)	37-40	16 (9)	30-38	<0.001^*	0.853
Impulse	17 (10)	26-30	12 (7)	21-25	<0.001^*	0.763
Goal	18 (8)	25-25	14 (8)	21-24	<0.001^*	0.525
Total	99 (41)	143-166	83 (30)	116-135	<0.001^*	0.88
TAS
TAS-A	20 (14)	33-34	13 (7)	21-25	<0.001^*	0.749
TAS-B	15 (4)	20-21	12 (4)	18-20	<0.001^*	0.746
TAS-C	24 (5)	31-34	21 (6)	29-34	<0.001^*	0.445
Total	57 (20)	76-77	48 (11)	58-63	<0.001^*	0.902
FAS-PV	26 (27)	-	-	-	-	-
YBOCS	26 (10)	-	-	-	-	-

p<0.05 indicates significance.

^* Mann-Whitney U test.

FAS-PV, Family Accommodation Scale-Patient Version; YBOCS, Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale; OCD, obsessive-compulsive disorder; DERS, Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale; TAS, Toronto Alexithymia Scale; TAS-A, difficulty to recognize emotions; TAS-B, difficulty to express emotions; TAS-C, extraverted thinking; IQR, interquartile range; CI, confidence interval; ES, effect size; -, not applicable.

Table 3.

Examining the relationship between variables for the patient group using correlation analysis

Variables	Spearman’s rho	FAS-PV	YBOCS	DERS							TAS
Variables	Spearman’s rho	FAS-PV	YBOCS	Fawareness	Clarity	Non-acceptance	Strategy	Impulse	Goal	Total	TAS-A	TAS-B	TAS-C
YBOCS	Correlation coefficient	0.302^**	1
YBOCS	p	0.002
DERS
Fawareness	Correlation coefficient	0.025	0.03
Fawareness	p	0.798	0.758
Clarity	Correlation coefficient	0.167	0.167	0.301^**	1
Clarity	p	0.086	0.086	0.002
Non-acceptance	Correlation coefficient	0.334^**	0.373^**	0.13	0.361^**	1
Non-acceptance	p	<0.001	<0.001	0.183	<0.001
Strategy	Correlation coefficient	0.362^**	0.442^**	0.233^*	0.394^**	0.703^**	1
Strategy	p	<0.001	0.001	0.016	<0.001	<0.001
Impulse	Correlation coefficient	0.240^*	0.300^**	0.193^*	0.390^**	0.647^**	0.839^**	1
Impulse	p	0.013	0.002	0.046	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Goal	Correlation coefficient	0.218^*	0.216^*	0.099	0.357^**	0.573^**	0.769^**	0.651^**	1
Goal	p	0.024	0.026	0.31	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
Total	Correlation coefficient	0.319^**	0.324^**	0.387^**	0.570^**	0.799^**	0.926^**	0.864^**	0.785^**	1
Total	p	0.001	0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
TAS
TAS-A	Correlation coefficient	0.276^**	0.338^**	0.239^*	0.531^**	0.587^**	0.655^**	0.688^**	0.540^**	0.747^**	1
TAS-A	p	0.004	<0.001	0.013	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
TAS-B	Correlation coefficient	0.302^**	0.224^*	0.193^*	0.376^**	0.588^**	0.651^**	0.594^**	0.559^**	0.685^**	0.786^**	1
TAS-B	p	0.002	0.02	0.046	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
TAS-C	Correlation coefficient	-0.025	-0.13	-0.188	-0.096	-0.103	-0.094	-0.126	-0.174	-0.173	-0.068	0.09	1
TAS-C	p	0.8	0.181	0.053	0.324	0.291	0.334	0.195	0.074	0.074	0.489	0.356
Total	Correlation coefficient	0.267^**	0.248^**	0.141	0.430^**	0.540^**	0.606^**	0.598^**	0.463^**	0.648^**	0.895^**	0.867^**	0.330^**
Total	p	0.005	0.01	0.148	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.001

^* correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed);

^** correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

YBOCS, Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale; FAS-PV, Family Accommodation Scale-Patient Version; DERS, Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale; TAS, Toronto Alexithymia Scale.

Table 4.

Determination of the factors affecting the effects of family harmony with regression model

Model	Variables	FAS-PV							95% CI
Model	Variables	B	Std. error	β	t	p	F	p	95% CI
1	(Constant)	-4.608	8.351		-0.552	0.582	6.866	<0.001	-21.17-11.950
	YBOCS	0.571	0.218	0.251	2.615	0.01			0.138-1.004
	DERS-total	0.130	0.075	0.213	1.742	0.085			-0.018-0.278
	TAS-total	0.067	0.175	0.046	0.386	0.701			-0.28-0.415
2	(Constant)	-2.756	6.804		-0.405	0.686	10.309	<0.001	-16.24-10.73
	YBOCS	0.576	0.217	0.253	2.655	0.009			0.146-1.010
	DERS-total	0.148	0.058	0.243	2.542	0.012			0.032-0.263

p<0.05 indicates significance. YBOCS, Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale; DERS, Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale; TAS, Toronto Alexithymia Scale; FAS-PV, Family Accommodation Scale-Patient Version; β, standardized coefficient; B, unstandardized coefficient; CI, confidence interval.

Table 5.

The effect of total, direct, and indirect effects of TAS-total variable on FAS-PV with mediator analysis

	ES	SE	BootSE	T	p	95% CI	c_cs
Total and direct effects of TAS-total on FAS-PV
Total impact
The effect of TAS-tototal on FAS-PV	0.3718	0.1384	-	2.6857	0.008	0.0973-0.6463	0.2535
Direct impact
The effect of TAS-tototal on FAS-PV	0.957	0.1795	-	0.5334	0.595	-0.2602-0.4517	0.0653
The indirect effects of the total mediator variable (DERS Total) on the total score (TAS-total) and FAS-PV
Indirect impact(s) of TAS-total on FAS-PV
DERS Total	0.2761	-	0.1314	-	-	0.0251-0.5439	-
Fully standardized indirect effect(s) of TAS-total on FAS-PV
DERS Total	0.1882	-	0.0885	-	-	0.0167-0.3674	-

p<0.05 indicates significance. TAS, Toronto Alexithymia Scale; FAS-PV, Family Accommodation Scale-Patient Version; ES, effect size; SE, standard error; BootSE, standardized impact; c_cs, standardized coefficient; DERS, Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale; CI, confidence interval; -, not applicable.

REFERENCES

1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Arlington: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.

2. Tamrchi S, Rabiee M. Investigating parenting styles and relationship obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms: the mediating role of alexithymia. Practice in Clinical Psychology 2024;12:165-178.

3. Shrinivasa B, Cherian AV, Arumugham SS, Philip BV, Pandian DR, Math SB, et al. Predictors of family accommodation in obsessive compulsive disorder. Asian J Psychiatr 2020;53:102189

4. Calvocoressi L, Lewis B, Harris M, Trufan SJ, Goodman WK, McDougle CJ, et al. Family accommodation in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Am J Psychiatry 1995;152:441-443.

5. Etkin RG, Bloch MH, Lebowitz ER. Family accommodation: a diagnostic feature of obsessive-compulsive disorder? Expert Rev Neurother 2024;24:129-131.

6. Liu CH, Li H, Wu E, Tung ES, Hahm HC. Parent perceptions of mental illness in Chinese American youth. Asian J Psychiatr 2020;47:101857

7. Robinson LJ, Freeston MH. Emotion and internal experience in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder: reviewing the role of alexithymia, anxiety sensitivity and distress tolerance. Clin Psychol Rev 2014;34:256-271.

8. Tapancı Z, Yıldırım A, Boysan M. Neurological soft signs, dissociation and alexithymia in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and healthy subjects. Psychiatry Res 2018;260:90-97.

9. Uslu U, Erensoy H, Meterelliyoz KS, Aytaç HM, Berkol TD. [Comparison of alexithymia level differences associated with obsessive compulsive disorder patients and healthy people]. J Neuro Behav Sci 2020;7:52-60. Turkish.

10. Bozorg M, Rahimi C, Mohammadi N. Evaluating the components of alexithymia in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Int Clin Neurosci J 2021;8:175-179.

11. Üstündağ M, Şen Gökçeimam P. Temperament, character traits and alexithymia in patients with obsessive compulsive disorder. Fam Pract Palliat Care 2020;5:45-52.

12. Smith R, Killgore WDS, Lane RD. The structure of emotional experience and its relation to trait emotional awareness: a theoretical review. Emotion 2018;18:670-692.

13. Gratz K, Roemer L. Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 2004;26:41-54.

14. Güçlü A, Yalçınkaya Alkar Ö. [COVID-19 stress as a predictor of obsessive-compulsive symptoms in the general population and evaluation of the mediating roles of emotion regulation difficulties, obsessive beliefs, and disgust in this relationship]. Turkish Journal of Psychology 2024;39:121-145. Turkish.

15. Ong E, Thompson C. The importance of coping and emotion regulation in the occurrence of suicidal behavior. Psychol Rep 2019;122:1192-1210.

16. Aldao A, Nolen-Hoeksema S. Gender and age differences in emotion regulation strategies and their relationship to depressive symptoms. Pers Individ Dif 2011;51:704-708.

17. Goodman WK, Price LH, Rasmussen SA, Mazure C, Fleischmann RL, Hill CL, et al. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. I. Development, use, and reliability. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1989;46:1006-1011.

18. Goodman WK, Price LH, Rasmussen SA, Mazure C, Delgado P, Heninger GR, et al. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. II. Validity. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1989;46:1012-1016.

19. Karamustafalıoğlu OK, Ucışık AM, Ulusoy M, Erkmen H. Validity and Reliability Study of the Yale-Brown Obsession-Compulsion Rating Scale. 29th National Psychiatry Cong.ress. Bursa Savaş Ofset 1993.

20. Wu MS, Pinto A, Horng B, Phares V, McGuire JF, Dedrick RF, et al. Psychometric properties of the Family Accommodation Scale for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder-Patient Version. Psychol Assess 2016;28:251-262.

21. Çöldür EÖ. Turkish validity and reliability study of the Family Cohesion Scale for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder-Patient Form (Specialization thesis). Manisa: Manisa Celal Bayar University; 2018.

22. Bagby RM, Parker JD, Taylor GJ. The twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale--I. Item selection and cross-validation of the factor structure. J Psychosom Res 1994;38:23-32.

23. Bagby RM, Taylor GJ, Parker JD. The twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale--II. Convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity. J Psychosom 1994;38:33-40.

24. Güleç H, Köse S, Güleç YM, Çitak S, Evren C, Borckardt J, et al. Reliability and factorial validity of the turkish version of the 20-item toronto alexithymia scale (TAS-20). Psychiatry Clin Psychopharmacol 2009;19:214-220.

25. Ruganci RN, Gençöz T. Psychometric properties of a Turkish version of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. J Clin Psychol 2010;66:442-455.

26. O’brien RM. A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Qual Quant 2007;41:673-690.

27. Demet MM, Deveci A, Deniz F, Taşkın EO, Şimşek E, Yurtsever F. [The phenomenology and demographic features of obsessivecompulsive disorder]. Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry 2005;6:133-144. Turkish.

28. Weissman MM, Bland RC, Canino GJ, Greenwald S, Hwu HG, Lee CK, et al. The cross national epidemiology of obsessive compulsive disorder. The Cross National Collaborative Group. J Clin Psychiatry 1994;55 Suppl:5-10.

29. Bal U, Çakmak S, Uğuz Ş. [Gender differences in symptoms of anxiety disorders]. Archives Medical Review Journal 2013;22:441-459. Turkish.

30. Pinto A, Van Noppen B, Calvocoressi L. Development and preliminary psychometric evaluation of a self-rated version of the Family Accommodation Scale for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. J Obsessive Compuls Relat Disord 2013;2:457-465.

31. Cherian AV, Pandian D, Bada Math S, Kandavel T, Janardhan Reddy YC. Family accommodation of obsessional symptoms and naturalistic outcome of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychiatry Res 2014;215:372-378.

32. Lee EB, Rufino KA, Cuenod MM, Zhang CC, Gong H, Zhang Y, et al. Family accommodation in Chinese individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psych J 2021;10:295-304.

33. Stewart SE, Beresin C, Haddad S, Egan Stack D, Fama J, Jenike M. Predictors of family accommodation in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Ann Clin Psychiatry 2008;20:65-70.

34. Polat H, Kartal F, Uğur K. Relationship between obsessional dissociation and family adjustment and anxiety sensitivity in individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Cukurova Medical Journal 2023;48:1033-1043.

35. Kuru T, Erden SÇ, Doğan V, Karakuş K. Characteristics and predictors of family accommodation in Turkish individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Turk J Med Sci 2023;53:594-602.

36. Mowrer OH. Learning Theory and Behavior. New York: Wiley; 1960.

37. Faraji H, Parlak D, Tezcan AE. [Evaluation of the relationship between obsessive compulsive disorder and difficulty in emotion regulation]. İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 2023;10:892-909. Turkish.

38. Taşkesen TÇ, İnözü M. [The Relationship between emotion regulation strategies and obsessive-compulsive disorder: an experimental study]. Journal of Clinical Psychology Research 2024;8:18-33. Turkish.

39. De Berardis D, Serroni N, Campanella D, Rapini G, Olivieri L, Feliziani B, et al. Alexithymia, responsibility attitudes and suicide ideation among outpatients with obsessive-compulsive disorder: an exploratory study. Compr Psychiatry 2015;58:82-87.

40. McKenzie ML, Donovan CL, Zimmer-Gembeck MJ, Waters AM, Mathieu SL, Farrell LJ. Examining parent-report of children’s emotion regulation in paediatric OCD: associations with symptom severity, externalising behaviour and family accommodation. J Obsessive Compuls Relat Disord 2020;25:100508

41. Storch EA, Geffken GR, Merlo LJ, Jacob ML, Murphy TK, Goodman WK, et al. Family accommodation in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol 2007;36:207-216.

42. Watson P, Clarkin J, Lomax C. What are the predictors of family accommodation of obsessive-compulsive behaviours in adults and youth with obsessive-compulsive disorder and their relatives? A systematic review. J Obsessive Compuls Relat Disord 2021;31:100681

43. Butler EA. Temporal interpersonal emotion systems: the “TIES” that form relationships. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2011;15:367-393.

44. Sbarra DA, Hazan C. Coregulation, dysregulation, self-regulation: an integrative analysis and empirical agenda for understanding adult attachment, separation, loss, and recovery. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2008;12:141-167.

45. Fischer MS, Baucom DH, Baucom BR, Abramowitz JS, Kirby JS, Bulik CM. Disorder-specific patterns of emotion coregulation in couples: comparing obsessive compulsive disorder and anorexia nervosa. J Fam Psychol 2017;31:304-315.

46. Stewart KE, Sumantry D, Malivoire BL. Family and couple integrated cognitive-behavioural therapy for adults with OCD: a meta-analysis. Focus (Am Psychiatr Publ) 2021;19:477-489.