Cold executive function processes and their hot analogs in schizotypy.

IF 2.6 4区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Penny Karamaouna, Chrysoula Zouraraki, Elias Economou, Konstantinos Kafetsios, Panos Bitsios, Stella G Giakoumaki
{"title":"<i>Cold</i> executive function processes and their <i>hot</i> analogs in schizotypy.","authors":"Penny Karamaouna, Chrysoula Zouraraki, Elias Economou, Konstantinos Kafetsios, Panos Bitsios, Stella G Giakoumaki","doi":"10.1017/S1355617723000590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine cold (based on logical reasoning) versus hot (having emotional components) executive function processes in groups with high individual schizotypal traits.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Two-hundred and forty-seven participants were administered the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire and were allocated into schizotypal (cognitive-perceptual, paranoid, negative, disorganized) or control groups according to pre-specified criteria. Participants were also administered a battery of tasks examining working memory, complex selective attention, response inhibition, decision-making and fluid intelligence and their affective counterparts. The outcome measures of each task were reduced to one composite variable thus formulating five cold and five hot cognitive domains. Between-group differences in the cognitive domains were examined with repeated measures analyses of covariance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For working memory, the control and the cognitive-perceptual groups outperformed negative schizotypes, while for affective working memory controls outperformed the disorganized group. Controls also scored higher compared with the disorganized group in complex selective attention, while both the control and the cognitive-perceptual groups outperformed negative schizotypes in complex affective selective attention. Negative schizotypes also had striking difficulties in response inhibition, as they scored lower compared with all other groups. Despite the lack of differences in fluid intelligence, controls scored higher compared with all schizotypal groups (except from cognitive-perceptual schizotypes) in emotional intelligence; the latter group reported higher emotional intelligence compared with negative schizotypes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results indicate that there is no categorical association between the different schizotypal dimensions with solely cold or hot executive function processes and support impoverished emotional intelligence as a core feature of schizotypy.</p>","PeriodicalId":49995,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","volume":" ","pages":"285-294"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617723000590","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To examine cold (based on logical reasoning) versus hot (having emotional components) executive function processes in groups with high individual schizotypal traits.

Method: Two-hundred and forty-seven participants were administered the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire and were allocated into schizotypal (cognitive-perceptual, paranoid, negative, disorganized) or control groups according to pre-specified criteria. Participants were also administered a battery of tasks examining working memory, complex selective attention, response inhibition, decision-making and fluid intelligence and their affective counterparts. The outcome measures of each task were reduced to one composite variable thus formulating five cold and five hot cognitive domains. Between-group differences in the cognitive domains were examined with repeated measures analyses of covariance.

Results: For working memory, the control and the cognitive-perceptual groups outperformed negative schizotypes, while for affective working memory controls outperformed the disorganized group. Controls also scored higher compared with the disorganized group in complex selective attention, while both the control and the cognitive-perceptual groups outperformed negative schizotypes in complex affective selective attention. Negative schizotypes also had striking difficulties in response inhibition, as they scored lower compared with all other groups. Despite the lack of differences in fluid intelligence, controls scored higher compared with all schizotypal groups (except from cognitive-perceptual schizotypes) in emotional intelligence; the latter group reported higher emotional intelligence compared with negative schizotypes.

Conclusion: Results indicate that there is no categorical association between the different schizotypal dimensions with solely cold or hot executive function processes and support impoverished emotional intelligence as a core feature of schizotypy.

精神分裂症的冷执行功能过程及其热类似物。
目的:在具有高度个体分裂型特征的群体中,检验冷(基于逻辑推理)与热(具有情感成分)执行功能过程。方法:对247名参与者进行分裂型人格问卷调查,并根据预先指定的标准将其分为分裂型(认知-知觉、偏执、消极、无组织)或对照组。参与者还接受了一系列任务,检查工作记忆、复杂的选择性注意力、反应抑制、决策和流动智力以及他们的情感对应物。每个任务的结果测量被简化为一个复合变量,从而形成五个冷认知领域和五个热认知领域。通过协方差的重复测量分析来检验认知领域的组间差异。结果:在工作记忆方面,对照组和认知-知觉组的表现优于消极型精神分裂症患者,而在情感工作记忆方面的表现优于无组织组。对照组在复杂选择性注意方面的得分也高于无组织组,而对照组和认知-知觉组在复杂情感选择性注意方面都优于消极分裂型。阴性精神分裂症患者在反应抑制方面也有显著困难,因为他们的得分低于所有其他组。尽管在流体智力方面缺乏差异,但与所有分裂型组(认知-感知分裂型除外)相比,对照组在情绪智力方面得分更高;与消极型精神分裂症患者相比,后一组患者的情商更高。结论:结果表明,不同的分裂型维度与单纯的冷或热执行功能过程之间没有明确的关联,支持贫困情绪智力是分裂型的核心特征。
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
5.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
185
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society is the official journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, an organization of over 4,500 international members from a variety of disciplines. The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society welcomes original, creative, high quality research papers covering all areas of neuropsychology. The focus of articles may be primarily experimental, applied, or clinical. Contributions will broadly reflect the interest of all areas of neuropsychology, including but not limited to: development of cognitive processes, brain-behavior relationships, adult and pediatric neuropsychology, neurobehavioral syndromes (such as aphasia or apraxia), and the interfaces of neuropsychology with related areas such as behavioral neurology, neuropsychiatry, genetics, and cognitive neuroscience. Papers that utilize behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological measures are appropriate. To assure maximum flexibility and to promote diverse mechanisms of scholarly communication, the following formats are available in addition to a Regular Research Article: Brief Communication is a shorter research article; Rapid Communication is intended for "fast breaking" new work that does not yet justify a full length article and is placed on a fast review track; Case Report is a theoretically important and unique case study; Critical Review and Short Review are thoughtful considerations of topics of importance to neuropsychology and include meta-analyses; Dialogue provides a forum for publishing two distinct positions on controversial issues in a point-counterpoint format; Special Issue and Special Section consist of several articles linked thematically; Letter to the Editor responds to recent articles published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society; and Book Review, which is considered but is no longer solicited.
×
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