 Whereas DM is supposed to modify metacognitions by teaching patients to solely observe their intrusive thoughts, CR aims at teaching the patients to actively question and modify their distorted interpretations of their intrusions. Since previous research has shown that symptom reduction is mediated by a change in metacognition but not by a change of distorted interpretations, the investigators hypothesize that, while expecting both interventions to be similarly effective on an overall scale, DM will lead to a change in both metacognitions and distorted interpretations whereas CR will predominantly have an effect on distorted interpretations while influencing metacognitions to a lesser extent. Further research questions address differences concerning the applicability of the two interventions in patients everyday life and the degree to which an intense psychoeducation can already have an effect on the participants overall symptom burden. 