Validation of the Spanish version of the multifaceted empathy test: comparison between cannabis use effects and controls in social cognition.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Alberto Sainz-Cort, Marta Martín-Islas, Daniel Jimenez-Garrido, Miriam López-Navarro, Genís Oña, Elena Muñoz-Marron, Luis Heredia, Mercè Gil-Pérez, Margarita Torrente, Paloma Vicens, José Carlos Bouso
{"title":"Validation of the Spanish version of the multifaceted empathy test: comparison between cannabis use effects and controls in social cognition.","authors":"Alberto Sainz-Cort, Marta Martín-Islas, Daniel Jimenez-Garrido, Miriam López-Navarro, Genís Oña, Elena Muñoz-Marron, Luis Heredia, Mercè Gil-Pérez, Margarita Torrente, Paloma Vicens, José Carlos Bouso","doi":"10.1097/YIC.0000000000000544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>While social cognition is shown to be impaired in several mental disorders, the effects of cannabis on social cognition are still not clear. Past studies have used the multifaceted empathy test (MET) to study social cognition. This study aims to test the validity of the MET Spanish version and to evaluate the effects of cannabis use on social cognition.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total 116 participants from a Cannabis Social Club (CSC) completed the MET and the reading the mind in the eyes test (RMET) under the effects of cannabis and were compared to 86 university students (control group). Internal consistency and convergent validity were assessed. Cognitive empathy (CE) and emotional empathy (EE) were tested in both groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The MET CE scale shows low internal consistency, while the EE scale shows high internal consistency. Items showed similar difficulty for both groups. Cannabis users showed deficient overall emotional recognition, with reduced scores associated with positive stimuli. Overall scores for EE were similar for both groups, but the experimental group scored lower with negative stimuli when compared to controls.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study validates the MET Spanish version for its use in future studies. Results confirmed deficient emotional recognition in cannabis users and a dampened reaction to negative stimuli for the first time.</p>","PeriodicalId":13698,"journal":{"name":"International Clinical Psychopharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Clinical Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/YIC.0000000000000544","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: While social cognition is shown to be impaired in several mental disorders, the effects of cannabis on social cognition are still not clear. Past studies have used the multifaceted empathy test (MET) to study social cognition. This study aims to test the validity of the MET Spanish version and to evaluate the effects of cannabis use on social cognition.

Methods: In total 116 participants from a Cannabis Social Club (CSC) completed the MET and the reading the mind in the eyes test (RMET) under the effects of cannabis and were compared to 86 university students (control group). Internal consistency and convergent validity were assessed. Cognitive empathy (CE) and emotional empathy (EE) were tested in both groups.

Results: The MET CE scale shows low internal consistency, while the EE scale shows high internal consistency. Items showed similar difficulty for both groups. Cannabis users showed deficient overall emotional recognition, with reduced scores associated with positive stimuli. Overall scores for EE were similar for both groups, but the experimental group scored lower with negative stimuli when compared to controls.

Conclusion: This study validates the MET Spanish version for its use in future studies. Results confirmed deficient emotional recognition in cannabis users and a dampened reaction to negative stimuli for the first time.

西班牙文版多方面移情测试的验证:使用大麻影响与社会认知对照组的比较。
目的:虽然多种精神疾病都显示社交认知能力受损,但大麻对社交认知能力的影响仍不明确。以往的研究使用多方面移情测试(MET)来研究社会认知。本研究旨在测试 MET 西班牙语版本的有效性,并评估吸食大麻对社会认知的影响:共有 116 名来自大麻社交俱乐部(CSC)的参与者在大麻作用下完成了 MET 和读心术测试(RMET),并与 86 名大学生(对照组)进行了比较。对内部一致性和收敛有效性进行了评估。对两组学生的认知移情(CE)和情感移情(EE)进行了测试:结果:MET CE 量表的内部一致性较低,而 EE 量表的内部一致性较高。两组的项目难度相似。大麻使用者的总体情绪识别能力不足,与积极刺激相关的得分降低。两组的 EE 总分相似,但与对照组相比,实验组对负面刺激的得分较低:本研究验证了 MET 西班牙语版本在未来研究中的应用。研究结果首次证实了大麻使用者的情绪识别能力不足以及对负面刺激的反应减弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
23.10%
发文量
97
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Clinical Psychopharmacology provides an essential link between research and clinical practice throughout psychopharmacology. It reports on studies in human subjects, both healthy volunteers and patients, which relate the effects of drugs on psychological processes. A major objective of the journal is to publish fully refereed papers which throw light on the ways in which the study of psychotropic drugs can increase our understanding of psychopharmacology. To this end the journal publishes results of early Phase I and II studies, as well as those of controlled clinical trials of psychotropic drugs in Phase II and IV. Other topics covered include the epidemiology of psychotropic drug prescribing and drug taking, the sociology of psychotropic drugs including compliance, and research into the safety and adverse effects of these compounds.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信