Affectively salient signal to random noise might be used to identify psychosis vulnerability in severe mental disorders

Subclinical psychotic symptoms are present in the general population. Furthermore, they are quite common in diagnostic categories beyond psychosis, such as BPD patients. We want to assess the differences between 3 groups: BPD (n = 68), FEP (n = 83) and controls (n = 203) in an experimental paradigm...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European psychiatry 2018-03, Vol.49, p.37-42
Main Authors: Catalan, Ana, de Artaza, Maider Gonzalez, Fernández-Rivas, Arantza, Angosto, Virxinia, Aguirregomoscorta, Fernando, Bustamante, Sonia, Díaz, Aida, Zamalloa, Iker, Olazabal, Nora, Bilbao, Amaia, Maruottolo, Claudio, Gonzalez-Torres, Miguel Angel
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Affect
Auditory Perception
Borderline personality disorder
Borderline Personality Disorder - psychology
Female
First episode psychosis
Humans
Illusions - psychology
Male
Noise
Psychosis
Psychotic Disorders - diagnosis
Salience
Speech
Speech illusion
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Subclinical psychotic symptoms are present in the general population. Furthermore, they are quite common in diagnostic categories beyond psychosis, such as BPD patients. We want to assess the differences between 3 groups: BPD (n = 68), FEP (n = 83) and controls (n = 203) in an experimental paradigm measuring the presence of speech illusions in white noise. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale was administered in the patient group, the Structured Interview for Schizotypy-Revised, and the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences in the control and BPD group. The white noise task was also analysed within a signal detection theory (SDT) framework. Logistic regression analyses and the general linear models were used to analyse the adjusted differences between groups. Differences were more prevalent in signals that were perceived as affectively salient in patients groups (9.6% in FEP vs 5.9% in BPD and 1% in controls; OR: 10.7; 95%CI: 2.2–51.6, p = 0.003 in FEP; OR: 6.3; 95%CI: 1.1–35.0, p = 0.036 in BPD). Besides, we found a worse general performance and more false alarms in the task for FEP group using SDT framework. Experimental paradigms indexing the tendency to detect affectively salient signals in noise may be used to identify liability to psychosis in people with vulnerability. Its predictable value in other diagnostic categories and general population requires further research.
ISSN:0924-9338
1778-3585
DOI:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.12.008