4.5 Article

Social cognition and metacognition in schizophrenia: evidence of their independence and linkage with outcomes

期刊

ACTA PSYCHIATRICA SCANDINAVICA
卷 127, 期 3, 页码 239-247

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/acps.12012

关键词

schizophrenia; metacognition; social cognition; theory of mind; negative symptoms

资金

  1. Veterans Administration Rehabilitation Research and Development Service

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lysaker PH, Gumley A, Luedtke B, Buck KD, Ringer JM, Olesek K, Kukla M, Leonhardt BL, Popolo R, Dimaggio G. Social cognition and metacognition in schizophrenia: evidence of their independence and linkage with outcomes. Objective: Research suggests that many with schizophrenia experience deficits in the ability to make discrete judgments about the thoughts and feelings of others as well as to form larger integrated representations of themselves and others. Little is known about whether these difficulties may be distinguished from one another and whether they are linked with different outcomes. Method: We administered three assessments of social cognition which tapped the ability to identify emotions and intentions and two metacognitive tasks which called for the formation of more integrated and flexible representations of the self and others. We additionally assessed symptoms, social functioning and neurocognition. Participants were 95 individuals with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder. Results: A principle components analysis followed by a varimax rotation revealed two factors which accounted for 62% of the variance. The first factor was comprised of the three social cognition tests and the second of two tasks that tapped the ability to create representations of oneself and others which integrate more discreet information. The first factor was uniquely correlated with negative symptoms, and the second was uniquely correlated with social function. Conclusion: Results suggest that deficits in social cognition and metacognition represent different forms of dysfunction in schizophrenia.

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