甲基苯丙胺使用障碍患者的社会认知与决策。

IF 5.2 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Addiction Pub Date : 2025-06-16 DOI:10.1111/add.70108
Justin Mahlberg, Lauren Hanegraaf, Josua Zimmermann, David M Cole, Boris B Quednow, Shalini Arunogiri, Antonio Verdejo-Garcia
{"title":"甲基苯丙胺使用障碍患者的社会认知与决策。","authors":"Justin Mahlberg, Lauren Hanegraaf, Josua Zimmermann, David M Cole, Boris B Quednow, Shalini Arunogiri, Antonio Verdejo-Garcia","doi":"10.1111/add.70108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Impairments in social cognition and social decision-making play an important role in the disease burden experienced by individuals with methamphetamine use disorder (MUD). They are also assumed to play a role in the vicious cycle of MUD development and hinder its successful psychotherapy. However, research typically focuses on examining specific types of social cognitive deficits in MUD, rather than profiling the multidimensional social cognition and decision-making impairments that coincide with MUD. Our study, thus, estimated the socio-cognitive and social decision-making profile of people with MUD and compared this profile with a methamphetamine-naïve control group.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional case-control comparison of social cognition and decision-making between participants with MUD recruited from clinical services and methamphetamine-naïve controls (CTRL) recruited from the community.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Drug treatment clinics in Melbourne, Australia.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>52 participants with MUD (moderate or severe; 77% identified as male) between April 2019 and September 2021 and 51 demographically matched CTRLs (no history of methamphetamine use; 54% identified as male) between May and September of 2021.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>We implemented a social cognition battery that assessed a participant's sensitivity for perceiving emotion from faces (emotion recognition) and their ability to detect accurately the emotional state of others (cognitive empathy) and experience the emotions of others (emotional empathy). We also characterised the propensity to engage in higher-order social decision-making by assessing a participant's willingness to engage in interpersonal trust and aggression in experimental simulations.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Compared with matched controls, people with MUD had a bias toward perceiving happier facial expressions as neutral [Estimate = -5.05, standard error (SE) = 2.05, P = 0.016, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = (-9.12 to -0.98)], showing lower sensitivity to perceiving happy emotions [Estimate = -6.34, SE = 3.09, P = 0.043, 95% CI = (-12.47 to -0.20)]. People with MUD also showed a propensity to enact more intense punishments [Estimate = 1.48, SE = 0.38, P < 0.001, 95% CI = (0.73-2.23)] and lower levels of trust to others in their decisions [Estimate = -0.11, SE = 0.04, P = 0.002, 95% CI = (-0.18 to -0.04)].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a clinical research study, people with methamphetamine use disorder appeared to show lower sensitivity to happy emotions, reduced trust and increased aggression toward others, relative to a matched control group.</p>","PeriodicalId":109,"journal":{"name":"Addiction","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social cognition and decision-making in people with methamphetamine use disorder.\",\"authors\":\"Justin Mahlberg, Lauren Hanegraaf, Josua Zimmermann, David M Cole, Boris B Quednow, Shalini Arunogiri, Antonio Verdejo-Garcia\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/add.70108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Impairments in social cognition and social decision-making play an important role in the disease burden experienced by individuals with methamphetamine use disorder (MUD). They are also assumed to play a role in the vicious cycle of MUD development and hinder its successful psychotherapy. However, research typically focuses on examining specific types of social cognitive deficits in MUD, rather than profiling the multidimensional social cognition and decision-making impairments that coincide with MUD. Our study, thus, estimated the socio-cognitive and social decision-making profile of people with MUD and compared this profile with a methamphetamine-naïve control group.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional case-control comparison of social cognition and decision-making between participants with MUD recruited from clinical services and methamphetamine-naïve controls (CTRL) recruited from the community.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Drug treatment clinics in Melbourne, Australia.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>52 participants with MUD (moderate or severe; 77% identified as male) between April 2019 and September 2021 and 51 demographically matched CTRLs (no history of methamphetamine use; 54% identified as male) between May and September of 2021.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>We implemented a social cognition battery that assessed a participant's sensitivity for perceiving emotion from faces (emotion recognition) and their ability to detect accurately the emotional state of others (cognitive empathy) and experience the emotions of others (emotional empathy). We also characterised the propensity to engage in higher-order social decision-making by assessing a participant's willingness to engage in interpersonal trust and aggression in experimental simulations.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Compared with matched controls, people with MUD had a bias toward perceiving happier facial expressions as neutral [Estimate = -5.05, standard error (SE) = 2.05, P = 0.016, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = (-9.12 to -0.98)], showing lower sensitivity to perceiving happy emotions [Estimate = -6.34, SE = 3.09, P = 0.043, 95% CI = (-12.47 to -0.20)]. People with MUD also showed a propensity to enact more intense punishments [Estimate = 1.48, SE = 0.38, P < 0.001, 95% CI = (0.73-2.23)] and lower levels of trust to others in their decisions [Estimate = -0.11, SE = 0.04, P = 0.002, 95% CI = (-0.18 to -0.04)].</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a clinical research study, people with methamphetamine use disorder appeared to show lower sensitivity to happy emotions, reduced trust and increased aggression toward others, relative to a matched control group.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Addiction\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Addiction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/add.70108\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/add.70108","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的:社会认知和社会决策障碍在甲基苯丙胺使用障碍(MUD)个体的疾病负担中起重要作用。他们也被认为在MUD发展的恶性循环中发挥作用,并阻碍其成功的心理治疗。然而,研究通常侧重于检查MUD中特定类型的社会认知缺陷,而不是分析与MUD相一致的多维社会认知和决策障碍。因此,我们的研究估计了MUD患者的社会认知和社会决策特征,并将其与methamphetamine-naïve对照组进行了比较。设计:从临床服务招募的MUD参与者和从社区招募的methamphetamine-naïve对照组(CTRL)之间的社会认知和决策的横断面病例对照比较。地点:澳大利亚墨尔本的药物治疗诊所。受试者:52例MUD患者(中度或重度;77%确定为男性),在2019年4月至2021年9月期间,有51个人口统计学上匹配的ctrl(无甲基苯丙胺使用史;(54%为男性)在2021年5月至9月期间。测量方法:我们实施了一个社会认知测试,评估了参与者从面部感知情绪的敏感度(情绪识别),以及他们准确检测他人情绪状态的能力(认知同理心)和体验他人情绪的能力(情感同理心)。我们还通过在实验模拟中评估参与者参与人际信任和攻击的意愿来描述参与高阶社会决策的倾向。结果:与匹配的对照组相比,MUD患者倾向于将快乐的面部表情感知为中性[估计= -5.05,标准误差(SE) = 2.05, P = 0.016, 95%置信区间(95% CI) =(-9.12 ~ -0.98)],对快乐情绪感知的敏感性较低[估计= -6.34,SE = 3.09, P = 0.043, 95% CI =(-12.47 ~ -0.20)]。MUD患者还表现出实施更强烈惩罚的倾向[估计值= 1.48,SE = 0.38, P]结论:在一项临床研究中,与匹配的对照组相比,甲基苯丙胺使用障碍患者对快乐情绪的敏感性较低,信任减少,对他人的攻击性增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social cognition and decision-making in people with methamphetamine use disorder.

Background and aims: Impairments in social cognition and social decision-making play an important role in the disease burden experienced by individuals with methamphetamine use disorder (MUD). They are also assumed to play a role in the vicious cycle of MUD development and hinder its successful psychotherapy. However, research typically focuses on examining specific types of social cognitive deficits in MUD, rather than profiling the multidimensional social cognition and decision-making impairments that coincide with MUD. Our study, thus, estimated the socio-cognitive and social decision-making profile of people with MUD and compared this profile with a methamphetamine-naïve control group.

Design: Cross-sectional case-control comparison of social cognition and decision-making between participants with MUD recruited from clinical services and methamphetamine-naïve controls (CTRL) recruited from the community.

Setting: Drug treatment clinics in Melbourne, Australia.

Participants: 52 participants with MUD (moderate or severe; 77% identified as male) between April 2019 and September 2021 and 51 demographically matched CTRLs (no history of methamphetamine use; 54% identified as male) between May and September of 2021.

Measurements: We implemented a social cognition battery that assessed a participant's sensitivity for perceiving emotion from faces (emotion recognition) and their ability to detect accurately the emotional state of others (cognitive empathy) and experience the emotions of others (emotional empathy). We also characterised the propensity to engage in higher-order social decision-making by assessing a participant's willingness to engage in interpersonal trust and aggression in experimental simulations.

Findings: Compared with matched controls, people with MUD had a bias toward perceiving happier facial expressions as neutral [Estimate = -5.05, standard error (SE) = 2.05, P = 0.016, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = (-9.12 to -0.98)], showing lower sensitivity to perceiving happy emotions [Estimate = -6.34, SE = 3.09, P = 0.043, 95% CI = (-12.47 to -0.20)]. People with MUD also showed a propensity to enact more intense punishments [Estimate = 1.48, SE = 0.38, P < 0.001, 95% CI = (0.73-2.23)] and lower levels of trust to others in their decisions [Estimate = -0.11, SE = 0.04, P = 0.002, 95% CI = (-0.18 to -0.04)].

Conclusions: In a clinical research study, people with methamphetamine use disorder appeared to show lower sensitivity to happy emotions, reduced trust and increased aggression toward others, relative to a matched control group.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Addiction
Addiction 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
319
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Addiction publishes peer-reviewed research reports on pharmacological and behavioural addictions, bringing together research conducted within many different disciplines. Its goal is to serve international and interdisciplinary scientific and clinical communication, to strengthen links between science and policy, and to stimulate and enhance the quality of debate. We seek submissions that are not only technically competent but are also original and contain information or ideas of fresh interest to our international readership. We seek to serve low- and middle-income (LAMI) countries as well as more economically developed countries. Addiction’s scope spans human experimental, epidemiological, social science, historical, clinical and policy research relating to addiction, primarily but not exclusively in the areas of psychoactive substance use and/or gambling. In addition to original research, the journal features editorials, commentaries, reviews, letters, and book reviews.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信