4.4 Article

Plasma oxytocin levels predict social cue recognition in individuals with schizophrenia

期刊

SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH
卷 162, 期 1-3, 页码 47-51

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2015.01.034

关键词

Oxytocin; Social cognition; Psychosis; Interpersonal

资金

  1. US National Institute of Mental Health [P50-MH082999]
  2. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Illness Research Education Clinical Centers VISN 5 pilot grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lower endogenous levels of the neuropeptide oxytocin may be an important biological predictor of social cognition impairments in schizophrenia (SZ). Prior studies have demonstrated that lower-level social cognitive processes (e.g., facial affect perception) are significantly associated with reduced plasma oxytocin levels in SZ; however, it is unclear whether higher-level social cognition, which requires inferential processes and knowledge not directly presented in the stimulus, is associated with endogenous oxytocin. The current study explored the association between endogenous oxytocin levels and lower-and higher-level social cognition in 40 individuals diagnosed with SZ and 22 demographically matched healthy controls (CN). All participants received the Social Cue Recognition Test (SCRT), which presents participants with videotaped interpersonal vignettes and subsequent true/false questions related to concrete or abstract aspects of social interactions in the vignettes. Results indicated that SZ had significantly higher plasma oxytocin concentrations than CN. SZ and CN did not differ on SCRT hits, but SZ hadmore false positives and lower sensitivity scores than CN. Higher plasma oxytocin levels were associated with better sensitivity scores for abstract items in CN and fewer false positives for concrete items in individuals with SZ. Findings indicate that endogenous oxytocin levels predict accurate encoding of lower-level socially relevant information in SZ. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据