The complex relationships between executive functions and positive symptoms in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Relationships between performance on various tests of executive functions and positive symptoms, especially delusions and hallucinations, have not been found consistently. This may be related to method of rating symptoms, to possible interactions between them, as well as to the low specificity of the cognitive test measures used. In this study, we have investigated the relationships between different aspects of positive symptomatology and several executive subprocesses. METHOD: Stable schizophrenia patients (n=96) were assessed for disorganization, delusion and hallucination symptoms rated from the Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms and the Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms. Interference sensitivity, inhibition and flexibility were assessed using the Wickens paradigm. The relationships between symptom dimensions as well as with cognitive and other potentially confounding variables were assessed using Pearson correlations and (simple and partial) stepwise regressions. RESULTS: Generally consistent with the cognitive constructs used to account for positive symptoms, the results indicated relationships between delusions, disorganization and inhibition, and between hallucinations and interference sensitivity. However, these relationships appeared more complex than expected, with some being dependent on interactions between symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest: (i) that the global measures usually employed may not be appropriate for demonstrating specific relationships between symptoms and executive functions and (ii) that it is necessary to take into account the interactions between positive symptoms as well as with other factors to reveal these relationships.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".