The epistemic and zetetic irrationality of incessant checking in OCD

Incessant checking is one of the most common compulsive behaviors used to relieve the anxiety caused by obsessions in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). It is agreed that this behavior can be practically irrational, since it only reduces anxiety temporarily and may interfere with one’s daily goals. But what about their irrationality as inquirers? Is there something irrational in what OCD checkers believe about their own inquiries, or in the way they carry them out? In this paper, I take a closer look at these questions. I argue that we must distinguish between those who keep inquiring despite holding incorrect beliefs about their prospects for success in inquiry, and those who do so despite holding correct beliefs about those prospects. In the first case, the failure occurs at the level of belief (i.e. the failure is epistemic), while in the latter case it occurs at the level of inquiry (i.e. the failure is zetetic). Distinguishing between these two scenarios allows for a finer-grained understanding of incessant checking in OCD than existing accounts provide. It also brings into view a dimension of insight that is not captured by standard clinical assessments, namely, whether the agent correctly evaluates her prospects for success in inquiry.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophical Psychology
Published
2026-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2026.2759801
Primary Topic
Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

The epistemic and zetetic irrationality of incessant checking in OCD

Ignasi Gil
1 links
Philosophical Psychology
Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
article

The epistemic and zetetic irrationality of incessant checking in OCD

Ignasi Gil
article en

Abstract

Incessant checking is one of the most common compulsive behaviors used to relieve the anxiety caused by obsessions in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). It is agreed that this behavior can be practically irrational, since it only reduces anxiety temporarily and may interfere with one’s daily goals. But what about their irrationality as inquirers? Is there something irrational in what OCD checkers believe about their own inquiries, or in the way they carry them out? In this paper, I take a closer look at these questions. I argue that we must distinguish between those who keep inquiring despite holding incorrect beliefs about their prospects for success in inquiry, and those who do so despite holding correct beliefs about those prospects. In the first case, the failure occurs at the level of belief (i.e. the failure is epistemic), while in the latter case it occurs at the level of inquiry (i.e. the failure is zetetic). Distinguishing between these two scenarios allows for a finer-grained understanding of incessant checking in OCD than existing accounts provide. It also brings into view a dimension of insight that is not captured by standard clinical assessments, namely, whether the agent correctly evaluates her prospects for success in inquiry.

Philosophical Psychology
Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES)
Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon