跳到结论和精神病妄想的形成:批判性分析

Q4 Medicine Psiquiatria Biologica Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.psiq.2020.12.002
Pablo López-Silva , Álvaro Cavieres
{"title":"跳到结论和精神病妄想的形成:批判性分析","authors":"Pablo López-Silva ,&nbsp;Álvaro Cavieres","doi":"10.1016/j.psiq.2020.12.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Delusions are one of the most complex symptoms of schizophrenic psychosis. The two-factor approach — one of the most popular approaches to the etiology of delusions in current neuropsychiatry — proposes the existence of experiential (factor<!--> <!-->1) and cognitive (factor<!--> <!-->2) alterations that, in interaction, would lead to the production of the symptom. One of the most referred cognitive alterations within this explanatory framework is the jumping to conclusions bias (JTC), namely, the tendency to arrive at conclusions without having sufficient evidence for them. This article offers a narrative review that, after clarifying the explanatory structure of the two-factor model, examines and critically evaluates the evidence used by the approach to stablish the JTC bias as one of the main cognitive alterations in the process of formation of delusions in psychosis and therefore, as empirical support in favor of the approach.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39337,"journal":{"name":"Psiquiatria Biologica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Salto a conclusiones y formación de delirios en psicosis: un análisis crítico\",\"authors\":\"Pablo López-Silva ,&nbsp;Álvaro Cavieres\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.psiq.2020.12.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Delusions are one of the most complex symptoms of schizophrenic psychosis. The two-factor approach — one of the most popular approaches to the etiology of delusions in current neuropsychiatry — proposes the existence of experiential (factor<!--> <!-->1) and cognitive (factor<!--> <!-->2) alterations that, in interaction, would lead to the production of the symptom. One of the most referred cognitive alterations within this explanatory framework is the jumping to conclusions bias (JTC), namely, the tendency to arrive at conclusions without having sufficient evidence for them. This article offers a narrative review that, after clarifying the explanatory structure of the two-factor model, examines and critically evaluates the evidence used by the approach to stablish the JTC bias as one of the main cognitive alterations in the process of formation of delusions in psychosis and therefore, as empirical support in favor of the approach.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psiquiatria Biologica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psiquiatria Biologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1134593420300671\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psiquiatria Biologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1134593420300671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

妄想是精神分裂症最复杂的症状之一。双因素方法是当前神经精神病学研究妄想病因最流行的方法之一,它提出了经验(因素1)和认知(因素2)改变的存在,它们相互作用,会导致症状的产生。在这一解释框架中,被提及最多的认知改变之一是直接得出结论的偏见(JTC),即在没有足够证据的情况下得出结论的倾向。本文提供了一个叙述性的回顾,在澄清了双因素模型的解释结构之后,检查和批判性地评估了该方法所使用的证据,这些证据将JTC偏见确立为精神病妄想形成过程中的主要认知改变之一,因此,作为支持该方法的经验支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Salto a conclusiones y formación de delirios en psicosis: un análisis crítico

Delusions are one of the most complex symptoms of schizophrenic psychosis. The two-factor approach — one of the most popular approaches to the etiology of delusions in current neuropsychiatry — proposes the existence of experiential (factor 1) and cognitive (factor 2) alterations that, in interaction, would lead to the production of the symptom. One of the most referred cognitive alterations within this explanatory framework is the jumping to conclusions bias (JTC), namely, the tendency to arrive at conclusions without having sufficient evidence for them. This article offers a narrative review that, after clarifying the explanatory structure of the two-factor model, examines and critically evaluates the evidence used by the approach to stablish the JTC bias as one of the main cognitive alterations in the process of formation of delusions in psychosis and therefore, as empirical support in favor of the approach.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psiquiatria Biologica
Psiquiatria Biologica Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: Es la Publicación Oficial de la Sociedad Española de Psiquiatría Biológica. Los recientes avances en el conocimiento de la bioquímica y de la fisiología cerebrales y el progreso en general en el campo de las neurociencias han abierto el camino al desarrollo de la psiquiatría biológica, fundada sobre bases anatomofisiológicas, más sólidas y científicas que la psiquiatría tradicional.
期刊最新文献
Síndrome de encefalopatía posterior reversible tras la terapia electroconvulsiva Síndrome delirante en el contexto de consumo de cannabis Case report. Pregnancy in women with an eating disorder Risk of hospital readmission in patients with psychotic symptoms and a history of drug use Concordancia del autorreporte y la valoración clínica de la ideación suicida
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1