Social Cognition and Aggression in Forensic Psychiatric Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there is an established link between untreated psychosis and aggression, the role of social cognition has been relatively neglected. This study examined various aspects of social cognitive functioning among forensic patients deemed not criminally responsible for acts of violence due to a psychotic disorder. The study sample25 forensic patients (10 recently aggressive and 15 not-recently aggressive) and 20 healthy controlscompleted the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Task-Revised (RMET), Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ), and Interpersonal Perception Task-15 (IPT-15). There were no significant differences on the RMET and TEQ based on violent index offence and recent aggressive behaviour. However, a pattern of misperceptions about interpersonal scenarios was identified utilizing the IPT-15 measure. Implications are discussed for a better clinical understanding of cues that might provoke and possibly escalate situational violence in individuals diagnosed with psychosis, as well as the potential for future research employing virtual reality technologies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".