MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102632633 · doi:10.1177/070674370505000503

The Negative Symptoms of Schizophrenia: A Cognitive Perspective

2005· review· en· W2102632633 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Neil A. Rector, Aaron T. Beck, Neal Stolar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDisengagement theoryCognitionExpectancy theoryPleasurePsychological interventionSocial cognitionDiathesisSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Social supportClinical psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatrySocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent reports of improvement in the negative symptoms of schizophrenia following targeted cognitive interventions have prompted interest in the cognitive underpinnings of these symptoms. This review integrates current experimental research with the phenomenological accounts of patients participating in cognitive therapy for these specific symptoms. We propose that, in addition to the well-established role of neurobiological factors in their development and maintenance, specific cognitive appraisals and beliefs play a role in the expression and persistence of negative symptoms. This cognitive model of negative symptoms is based on a diathesis-stress formulation: a continuum of predispositional traits from the premorbid personality to the full-blown negative symptomatology, the incorporation of negative social and performance attitudes within these traits, and low expectancies for pleasure or success in goal-oriented activities. We suggest that negative symptoms represent, in part, a compensatory pattern of disengagement in response to threatening delusional beliefs, perceived social threat, and anticipated failure in tasks and social activities. A psychological aspect of this motivational and behavioural inertia appears to be the patient's perception of limited psychological resources--a perception that motivates patients to conserve energy by minimizing investment in activities requiring effort.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations269
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207