4.5 Article

Allocating effort and anticipating pleasure in schizophrenia: Relationship with real world functioning

期刊

EUROPEAN PSYCHIATRY
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 57-64

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.07.008

关键词

Temporal discounting; Amotivation; Schizophrenia; Self-efficacy; Defeatist beliefs; Reward expectation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Poor motivation to engage in goal-oriented behavior has been recognized as a hallmark feature of schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SZ). Low drive in SZ may be related to anticipating rewards as well as to poor working memory. However, few studies to date have examined beliefs about self-efficacy and satisfaction for future rewards (anticipatory pleasure). Additionally, few studies to date have examined how these deficits may impact SZ patients' real world functioning. Method: The present study examined SZ patients' (n = 57) anticipatory pleasure, working memory, self-efficacy and real world functioning in relation to their negative symptom severity. Results: Results revealed that SZ patients' negative symptom severity was related to decisions in effort allocation and reward probability, working memory deficits, self-efficacy and anticipatory pleasure for future reward. Effort allocation deficits also predicted patients' daily functioning skills. Conclusions: SZ patients with high levels of negative symptoms are not merely effort averse, but have more difficulty effectively allocating effort and anticipating pleasure engaging in effortful activities. It may be the case that continuously failing to achieve reinforcement from engagement and participation may lead SZ patients to form certain negative beliefs about their abilities which contributes to amotivation and cognitive deficits. Lastly, our findings provide further support for a link between SZ patients functional daily living skills their effort allocation. (C) 2017 Elsevier Masson SAS. 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

4.5
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