Schizophrenia patients perform as well as healthy controls on creative problem solving when fluid intelligence is accounted for.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Cognitive Neuropsychiatry Pub Date : 2023-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-22 DOI:10.1080/13546805.2023.2215921
Hanna Kucwaj, Zdzisław Gajewski, Adam Chuderski
{"title":"Schizophrenia patients perform as well as healthy controls on creative problem solving when fluid intelligence is accounted for.","authors":"Hanna Kucwaj,&nbsp;Zdzisław Gajewski,&nbsp;Adam Chuderski","doi":"10.1080/13546805.2023.2215921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study examined creative problem solving in schizophrenia. We aimed to verify three hypotheses: (H1) schizophrenia patients differ from healthy controls in the accuracy of creative problem solving; (H2) schizophrenia patients are less effective at evaluating and rejecting incorrect associations and (H3) have a more idiosyncratic way of searching for semantic associations compared to controls.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six Remote Associates Test (RAT) items and three insight problems were applied to schizophrenia patients and healthy controls. We compared groups on the overall accuracy in the tasks to verify H1 and developed a novel method of comparing the patterns of errors in the RAT to verify H2 and H3. We controlled for fluid intelligence to eliminate this significant source of variation, as typically creativity and intelligence are significantly related.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bayesian factor analysis did not support the group differences in either insight problems and RAT accuracy or the patterns of RAT errors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The patients performed as well as the controls on both tasks. Analysis of RAT errors suggested that the process of searching for remote associations is comparable in both groups. It is highly improbable that individuals with schizophrenia benefit from their diagnosis during creative problem solving.</p>","PeriodicalId":51277,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Neuropsychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"253-268"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Neuropsychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13546805.2023.2215921","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study examined creative problem solving in schizophrenia. We aimed to verify three hypotheses: (H1) schizophrenia patients differ from healthy controls in the accuracy of creative problem solving; (H2) schizophrenia patients are less effective at evaluating and rejecting incorrect associations and (H3) have a more idiosyncratic way of searching for semantic associations compared to controls.

Methods: Six Remote Associates Test (RAT) items and three insight problems were applied to schizophrenia patients and healthy controls. We compared groups on the overall accuracy in the tasks to verify H1 and developed a novel method of comparing the patterns of errors in the RAT to verify H2 and H3. We controlled for fluid intelligence to eliminate this significant source of variation, as typically creativity and intelligence are significantly related.

Results: Bayesian factor analysis did not support the group differences in either insight problems and RAT accuracy or the patterns of RAT errors.

Conclusions: The patients performed as well as the controls on both tasks. Analysis of RAT errors suggested that the process of searching for remote associations is comparable in both groups. It is highly improbable that individuals with schizophrenia benefit from their diagnosis during creative problem solving.

当考虑到流体智力时,精神分裂症患者在创造性解决问题方面的表现与健康对照组一样好。
引言:本研究考察了精神分裂症患者创造性问题解决的情况。我们旨在验证三个假设:(H1)精神分裂症患者在创造性问题解决的准确性方面与健康对照组不同;(H2)与对照组相比,精神分裂症患者在评估和拒绝不正确的联想方面效果较差,(H3)在搜索语义联想方面更为独特。方法:对精神分裂症患者和健康对照组进行6项远程联想测试(RAT)和3项自知问题。我们比较了验证H1任务的总体准确性,并开发了一种比较RAT中错误模式以验证H2和H3的新方法。我们控制了流动的智力,以消除这种重要的变异来源,因为创造力和智力通常是显著相关的。结果:贝叶斯因素分析不支持洞察问题和RAT准确性或RAT错误模式的群体差异。结论:患者在这两项任务上的表现与对照组一样好。对RAT错误的分析表明,在两组中搜索远程关联的过程是可比较的。精神分裂症患者在创造性解决问题的过程中从诊断中获益的可能性很小。
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
3.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
18
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cognitive Neuropsychiatry (CNP) publishes high quality empirical and theoretical papers in the multi-disciplinary field of cognitive neuropsychiatry. Specifically the journal promotes the study of cognitive processes underlying psychological and behavioural abnormalities, including psychotic symptoms, with and without organic brain disease. Since 1996, CNP has published original papers, short reports, case studies and theoretical and empirical reviews in fields of clinical and cognitive neuropsychiatry, which have a bearing on the understanding of normal cognitive processes. Relevant research from cognitive neuroscience, cognitive neuropsychology and clinical populations will also be considered. There are no page charges and we are able to offer free color printing where color is necessary.
×
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