Disorganized communication and social dysfunction in schizophrenia: Emerging concepts and methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose of review: In this review, we embrace the emerging field of second-person neuroscience to address disorganization in schizophrenia. We argue that the focus of interest for disorganization is the interpersonal space where shared mental processes (‘social mind’) occur based on the bio-behavioural synchrony between two (or more) interacting people. We lay out several bio-behavioural measures that can capture the component parts of this process. In particular, we highlight the real-time imaging technology of hyperscanning that enables multi-person analysis of naturalistic social interaction. We illustrate how these measures can be used in empirical studies by posing disorganization as a problem of interpersonal processing. Recent findings: Traditionally, disorganized speech and behaviour have been studied as the product of hidden cognitive processes (‘private mind’). A dysfunction in these processes was attributed to the brain afflicted by the illness (‘brain-bound mechanisms’). But this approach has contributed to challenges in measuring and quantifying disorganization. Consequently, the single-brain focus has not provided satisfactory clarity or led to effective treatments for persistent social dysfunction in schizophrenia.Summary: Social dysfunction is a core feature of schizophrenia. This dysfunction arises from disorganized interpersonal interaction that typifies the social profile of affected individuals. We outline challenges in employing several emerging concepts and methods and how they can be addressed to investigate the mechanisms of social dysfunction in schizophrenia.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".