MOTIVATION AND PLEASURE IN THE SCHIZOPHRENIA SPECTRUM–FINDINGS FROM THE PRODROME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Schizophreniais a chronic and debilitating illness that affects approximately one percent of the population. The symptoms of schizophrenia are typically thought of in separate domains, including positive symptoms (hallucinations and delusions), negative symptoms (diminished emotional expression and amotivation), and cognitive deficits. Importantly, the negative symptoms have been consistently found to adversely influence functional outcomes, in particular due to markedamotivation.^1 There have been suggestions that these individuals also experience deficits in the experience of pleasure, especially in their capacity to anticipate pleasure.^2 However, such investigations have not included the examination of these symptoms in those in the prodromal phase ofthis illness, a time that holds promise for early intervention and altering thecourse of schizophrenia.^3 Methods: In an effort to examine deficits in motivation and pleasure in the prodromal phase of schizophrenia, we have used an experience sampling method to assess “in the moment” motivation and pleasure in individuals at high risk of developing schizophrenia and healthy controls. Subjects completed baseline assessments including evaluation of their positive and negative symptoms. Subsequently, through the use of a personal digital assistant, subjects rated their motivation and experience of consummatory and anticipatory pleasure in their daily lives, multiple times over the course of four days. Results and Conclusions: Preliminary data will be presented, as well as the importance of these findings in the context of understanding the underlying pathobiology of this illness, and guiding our search for effective treatments to improvefunctional outcomes in schizophrenia. References: 1. Sayers SL, Curran PJ, Mueser KT. Psychol Assessment 1996;8:269-80. 2. Gard DE, Kring AM, Gard GM, et al.. Schizophr Res 2007;93:253-60.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".