throughout the process. However, overall, the paper was deemed appropriate for inclusion in this review. Description of the Results Measures. Forty-nine different measures were used across all studies, with 10 of those specifically measuring mental contamination (Mental Contamination Report (MCR) .88 (Elliott & Radomsky, 2009); Mental Contamination Interview not Cronbach’s α=.41to (α reported) (Rachman, 2006); Mental Pollution Questionnaire (MPQ) for the washing α=.86 subscale and for inward contamination subscale (Cougle et al. 2008); the Vancouver α=.85 Obsessional Compulsive Inventory Mental Contamination Scale (VOCI-MC) – α=.94 (Rachman, 2006); Thought-Action Fusion- Mental Contamination Scale (TAF-MC) α=.92 (Rachman, 2006); Sexual Assault and Rape Appraisals (SARA) (Fairbrother & α=.80 Rachman, 2004); Obsessive Compulsive Inventory Short Version (OCI-R) to .93 – α=.57 (Foa et al., 2002); Contamination Sensitivity Scale not reported (Rachman, 2005b); (CSS) α Contamination Thought-Action Fusion Scale (CTAF) not reported (Rachman, 2005c); and α the Unwanted Sexual Experiences Study Questionnaire (USES) not reported (Fairbrother, α Newth & Rachman, 2005), which includes questions specific to mental contamination). Some of these measures were adapted from other OCD and contamination specific measures to include explicit questions on mental contamination. Not all of the studies reported the internal consistency or reliability data for the measures used. It is therefore difficult to be confident that they are all reliable and valid measures of mental contamination. Whilst the majority of those that did state alpha (α) figures report good to Cronbach’s excellent amounts of internal consistency within the measures, the OCI-R and MCR reported ranges of internal consistency with the lowest point showing poor to unacceptable levels. As well as these standardised measures used to measure mental contamination, Visual analogue
throughout the process. However, overall, the paper was deemed appropriate for inclusion in this review. Description of the Results Measures. Forty-nine different measures were used across all studies, with 10 of those specifically measuring mental contamination (Mental Contamination Report (MCR) Cronbach’s α=.41to .88 (Elliott & Radomsky, 2009); Mental Contamination Interview (α not reported) (Rachman, 2006); Mental Pollution Questionnaire (MPQ) α=.86 for the washing subscale and α=.85 for inward contamination subscale (Cougle et al. 2008); the Vancouver Obsessional Compulsive Inventory – Mental Contamination Scale (VOCI-MC) α=.94 (Rachman, 2006); Thought-Action Fusion- Mental Contamination Scale (TAF-MC) α=.92 (Rachman, 2006); Sexual Assault and Rape Appraisals (SARA) α=.80 (Fairbrother & Rachman, 2004); Obsessive Compulsive Inventory – Short Version (OCI-R) α=.57 to .93 (Foa et al., 2002); Contamination Sensitivity Scale (CSS) α not reported (Rachman, 2005b); Contamination Thought-Action Fusion Scale (CTAF) α not reported (Rachman, 2005c); and the Unwanted Sexual Experiences Study Questionnaire (USES) α not reported (Fairbrother, Newth & Rachman, 2005), which includes questions specific to mental contamination). Some of these measures were adapted from other OCD and contamination specific measures to include explicit questions on mental contamination. Not all of the studies reported the internal consistency or reliability data for the measures used. It is therefore difficult to be confident that they are all reliable and valid measures of mental contamination. Whilst the majority of those that did state Cronbach’s alpha (α) figures report good to excellent amounts of internal consistency within the measures, the OCI-R and MCR reported ranges of internal consistency with the lowest point showing poor to unacceptable levels. As well as these standardised measures used to measure mental contamination, Visual analogue