Subjective experience of cognitive failures as possible risk factor for negative symptoms of psychosis in the general populations

S. Pfeifer, J. van Os, M. Hanssen, P. Delespaul, L. Krabbendam

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine whether proneness to subjective cognitive failure (cognitive based mistakes) increases the risk for the development of symptoms of psychosis and to what degree any association was familial. Methods: At baseline, the Cognitive Failure Questionnaire (CFQ) and the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) questionnaire were administered in a general population sample of genetically related individuals (n = 755). Individuals scoring high (>75th percentile) or average on the CAPE (between 40th and 60th percentile) (n = 488) were reinterviewed with the CAPE and Structured Interview for Schizotypy—Revised (SIS-R) at follow-up (mean interval = 7.7 months, SD = 4.8 months). Results: Cross-trait, within-relative analysis showed a significant association between the CFQ and the negative dimension, assessed with both the CAPE and SIS-R, whereas no association was found between the CFQ and the positive dimension. Cross-trait, between-relative analyses showed no association between the CFQ in one relative and any of the dimensions of the subclinical psychosis phenotype in the other relative. Conclusion: Proneness to subjective cognitive failure possibly contributes to the development or persistence of negative symptoms and can be seen as potential risk factor for negative symptoms of psychosis. This overlap is due to individual effects rather than familial liability.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)766-774
Number of pages9
JournalSchizophrenia Bulletin
Volume35
Issue number4
Early online date21 Feb 2008
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2009

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Subjective experience of cognitive failures as possible risk factor for negative symptoms of psychosis in the general populations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this