Understanding the Psychosis Spectrum Using a Hierarchical Model of Social Cognition.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Social cognitive impairments are central to psychosis, including lower severity psychosis-like experiences (PLEs). Nonetheless, progress has been hindered by social cognition's poorly defined factor structure, as well as limited work examining the specificity of social cognitive impairment to psychosis. The present study examined how PLEs relate to social cognition in the context of other psychopathology dimensions, using a hierarchical factors approach to social cognition.
STUDY
DESIGN
Online community participants (N = 1026) completed psychosis, autism, and personality disorder questionnaires, as well as 3 social cognitive tasks that varied in methodology (vignette vs video) and construct (higher- vs lower-level social cognition). Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were used to model social cognition, with the best models being examined in association with PLEs and psychopathology dimensions.
STUDY
RESULTS
EFA and CFA supported a hierarchical model of social cognition, with 2 higher-order factors emerging: verbal/vignette task methodology and a multimethod general social cognition factor. These higher-order factors accounted for task-level associations to psychopathology, with relations to positive symptoms (r = .23) and antagonism (r = .28). After controlling for other psychopathology, positive symptoms were most clearly related to tasks with verbal methodology (β = -0.34).
CONCLUSIONS
These results suggest that broad social cognitive processes and method effects may account for many previous findings in psychosis and psychopathology research. Additionally, accounting for broad social cognitive impairment may yield insights into more specific social cognitive processes as well.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.