Exploring mechanisms of change in the metacognitive training for depression.

The Metacognitive Training for Depression (D-MCT) is a highly structured group therapy that has been shown to be effective in reducing depressive symptoms. First evidence suggests that need for control represents a mechanism of change. However, more research is needed to evaluate the mode of action of each module and identify predictors of treatment response. Two sequential studies (one naturalistic pilot study [study I, N = 45] and one randomized controlled trial [study II, N = 32]) were conducted to evaluate the session-specific effects and predictors of D-MCT in patients with depression. The D-MCT was conducted over eight weeks, and patients answered a questionnaire on dysfunctional beliefs (e.g., negative filter) and depressive symptoms (e.g., lack of energy, self-esteem) before and after each session. Linear mixed-effects models showed that several dysfunctional beliefs and symptoms improved over the course of the treatment; three modules were able to evoke within-session effects, but no between-session effects were found. The improvement in lack of energy in one module was identified as a relevant predictor in study I via lasso regression but was not replicated in study II. Exploratory analyses revealed further predictors that warrant replication in future studies. The identified predictors were inconclusive when the two studies were compared, which may be explained by the different instruments administered. Even so, the results may be used to revise questionnaires and improve the intervention.

Side effects of the metacognitive training for depression compared to a cognitive remediation training in patients with depression.

Although awareness of side effects over the course of psychotherapy is growing, side effects are still not always reported. The purpose of the present study was to examine side effects in a randomized controlled trial comparing Metacognitive Training for Depression (D-MCT) and a cognitive remediation training in patients with depression. 84 patients were randomized to receive either D-MCT or cognitive remediation training (MyBrainTraining) for 8 weeks. Side effects were assessed after the completion of each intervention (post) using the Short Inventory of the Assessment of Negative Effects (SIAN) and again 6 months later (follow-up) using the Negative Effects Questionnaire (NEQ). D-MCT and MyBrainTraining did not differ significantly in the number of side effects. At post assessment, 50% of the D-MCT group and 59% of the MyBrainTraining group reported at least one side effect in the SIAN. The most frequently reported side effect was disappointment in subjective benefit of study treatment. At follow-up, 52% reported at least one side effect related to MyBrainTraining, while 34% reported at least one side effect related to the D-MCT in the NEQ. The most frequently reported side effects fell into the categories of "symptoms" and "quality". Our NEQ version was missing one item due to a technical error. Also, allegiance effects should be considered. The sample size resulted in low statistical power. The relatively tolerable number of side effects suggests D-MCT and MyBrainTraining are safe and well-received treatment options for people with depression. Future studies should also measure negative effects to corroborate our results.

Using virtual reality to explore differences in memory biases and cognitive insight in people with psychosis and healthy controls.

Memory biases (e.g. overconfidence in false memories) are implicated in the pathogenesis of delusions. Virtual reality (VR) may provide an opportunity to observe such biases and improve cognitive insight in patients with psychosis via corrective feedback. Thirty-nine patients with psychosis and 20 healthy controls explored VR environments designed to elicit false memories and subsequently had to recollect items and faces. We used a randomised-controlled design where half of the sample received performance feedback on the recollection task in order to correct overconfidence. Changes in cognitive insight were measured using the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale. Regarding accuracy, patients performed worse on the social task (recollection of faces) only. Patients displayed overconfidence in false memories for emotions and gave more high-confident responses compared to healthy controls on the social task. Feedback did not improve cognitive insight. Patients rated their cognitive insight higher than healthy controls. Future research should address problems with subjective measurements for cognitive insight. To conclude, patients with psychosis showed impaired social cognition and there was evidence for impaired metacognition, as patients reported higher cognitive insight despite comparable or worse performance as well as overconfidence relative to controls.

Subjective versus objective cognition: Evidence for poor metacognitive monitoring in schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia display a number of cognitive biases, particularly a tendency to jump to conclusions, which are implicated in the pathogenesis of the disorder. The present study contrasted the degree of objective reasoning biases with subjective cognitive insight. We expected that patients with schizophrenia would display greater objective than subjective impairment suggestive of poor metacognitive awareness. METHODS: Patients with schizophrenia (n=140) and healthy controls (n=60) underwent a test battery encompassing a cognitive bias paradigm (beads task) as well as neurocognitive tests (story recall, trail-making tests). In addition, they were administered the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale (BCIS), a subjective measure of (meta)cognitive awareness. RESULTS: Corroborating prior research on decision making, draws to decisions were significantly delayed in controls relative to patients, whereas the core jumping to conclusion parameter (i.e., decision after one or two pieces of information) bordered significance. Patients with schizophrenia showed a lowered decision threshold and impaired neurocognition relative to nonclinical controls. Despite poor cognitive performance and prior psychotic episodes, patients with schizophrenia showed similar scores on the self-confidence subscale of the BCIS and reported even higher levels of self-reflectiveness relative to healthy controls. DISCUSSION: The study demonstrates that patients with schizophrenia show severe cognitive biases and neurocognitive deficits but display only partial awareness herein. Raising cognitive insight in a non-insulting fashion and elevating patients' corrigibility as well as willingness to consider others' feedback and advice may help to narrow this gap and improve psychiatric symptomatology.