Social Competence Versus Negative Symptoms as Predictors of Real World Social Functioning in Schizophrenia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social deficits are common in people with schizophrenia and the treatment of social skills deficits has been a long-time treatment strategy. However, negative (i.e., deficit) symptoms also appear to contribute to social dysfunction. In this study, we combined data from three separate studies of people with schizophrenia (total n=561) who were assessed with identical methods. We examined the prediction of real-world social functioning, rated by high contact clinicians, comparing the influence of global and specific ratings of negative symptoms and performance-based assessments of social skills on these social outcomes. Negative symptom severity accounted for 20% of the variance in social outcomes, with social competence adding an incremental 2%. This 2% variance contribution was the same when social competence was forced into a regression model prior to negative symptom severity. When we examined individual negative symptoms, prediction of social outcomes increased to 28%, with active and passive social avoidance entering the equation, and the influence of social competence was unchanged. Adding depression into the predictor model improved the prediction of social outcomes significantly, but minimally (4% variance). These data suggest that negative symptoms exert a substantial influence on social outcomes and that depression and social skills exert smaller, but independent influences. Treating negative symptoms appears to be a possible path for improving social outcomes.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it