To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Negative symptoms are a key feature of several psychiatric disorders. Difficulty identifying common neurobiological mechanisms that cut across diagnostic boundaries might result from equifinality (i.e., multiple mechanistic pathways to the same clinical profile), both within and across disorders. This study used a data-driven approach to identify unique subgroups of participants with distinct reward processing profiles to determine which profiles predicted negative symptoms.
Methods
Participants were a transdiagnostic sample of youth from a multisite study of psychosis risk, including 110 individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR; meeting psychosis-risk syndrome criteria), 88 help-seeking participants who failed to meet CHR criteria and/or who presented with other psychiatric diagnoses, and a reference group of 66 healthy controls. Participants completed clinical interviews and behavioral tasks assessing four reward processing constructs indexed by the RDoC Positive Valence Systems: hedonic reactivity, reinforcement learning, value representation, and effort–cost computation.
Results
k-means cluster analysis of clinical participants identified three subgroups with distinct reward processing profiles, primarily characterized by: a value representation deficit (54%), a generalized reward processing deficit (17%), and a hedonic reactivity deficit (29%). Clusters did not differ in rates of clinical group membership or psychiatric diagnoses. Elevated negative symptoms were only present in the generalized deficit cluster, which also displayed greater functional impairment and higher psychosis conversion probability scores.
Conclusions
Contrary to the equifinality hypothesis, results suggested one global reward processing deficit pathway to negative symptoms independent of diagnostic classification. Assessment of reward processing profiles may have utility for individualized clinical prediction and treatment.
Delusions are false and incorrigible beliefs. They have yet to yield to psychological or neurobiological explanation. Contemporary theories attempt to bridge these levels of explanation. However, they differ in the allowable directions of influence between brain regions and psychological processes. More recently, beliefs and belief updating have fallen under the lens of social network theories. Uniting individual level accounts with those that incorporate the influence of others on ones’ beliefs may yield new avenues for treatment, that leverage key nodes in an individual’s extant social network, or that reconfigure networks to facilitate more healthful and appropriate belief formation and updating.
Individual-specific predispositions may precede the cultural evolution of shamanism and may be linked to it via principles of predictive coding. We have used these principles to identify commonalities between clinical and shaman-like non-clinical voice-hearers. The author may find this approach helpful in relating the experiences of shamans to those of their clients.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.