Schizophrenia bulletin · 2025
Genetic Differences in Reactivity to the Environment Impact Psychotic-Like and Affective Reactivity in Daily Life.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Barrantes-Vidal Neus, Torrecilla Pilar, Mas-Bermejo Patricia, Papiol Sergi, Bakermans-Kranenburg Marian J, Rosa Araceli, Kwapil Thomas R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Consistent with diathesis-stress models, psychosis research has focused on genetic moderation of adverse environmental exposures. In contrast, the Differential Susceptibility (DS) model suggests that the same genetic variants that increase risk-inducing effects of adverse experiences also enhance beneficial effects from positive experiences. This study examined whether individuals with high genetic susceptibility to the environment showed differential psychotic-like and affective reactivity in response to positive and negative events in daily life.
STUDY DESIGN: Experience sampling methodology assessed context (positive and stressful) and momentary levels of paranoia, psychotic-like experiences (PLE), and positive (PA) and negative affect (NA) in 217 non-clinical adults oversampled for schizotypy. Linear mixed models examined whether Polygenic Risk Scores of Environmental Sensitivity (PRS-ES) moderated the impact of current context on subsequent experiences.
STUDY RESULTS: PRS-ES moderated positive, but not stressful, context on subsequent levels of momentary paranoia, NA, and PA, but not PLE. Genetic and environmental (G × E) interactions indicated diathesis-stress at lower thresholds of PRS-ES, but a DS model at the highest threshold of the PRS-ES. Participants with elevated PRS-ES showed increased paranoia and NA and decreased PA in subsequent assessments when reporting low levels of positive situations, but also decreased paranoia and NA and increased PA when rating contexts as positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the influence of genetic sensitivity to the environment on psychotic-like and affective reactivity in daily life, particularly in response to positive contexts. This highlights the transdiagnostic protective role of positive experiences and informs ecological momentary interventions.
STUDY DESIGN: Experience sampling methodology assessed context (positive and stressful) and momentary levels of paranoia, psychotic-like experiences (PLE), and positive (PA) and negative affect (NA) in 217 non-clinical adults oversampled for schizotypy. Linear mixed models examined whether Polygenic Risk Scores of Environmental Sensitivity (PRS-ES) moderated the impact of current context on subsequent experiences.
STUDY RESULTS: PRS-ES moderated positive, but not stressful, context on subsequent levels of momentary paranoia, NA, and PA, but not PLE. Genetic and environmental (G × E) interactions indicated diathesis-stress at lower thresholds of PRS-ES, but a DS model at the highest threshold of the PRS-ES. Participants with elevated PRS-ES showed increased paranoia and NA and decreased PA in subsequent assessments when reporting low levels of positive situations, but also decreased paranoia and NA and increased PA when rating contexts as positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the influence of genetic sensitivity to the environment on psychotic-like and affective reactivity in daily life, particularly in response to positive contexts. This highlights the transdiagnostic protective role of positive experiences and informs ecological momentary interventions.