Borderline Personality Disorder: Associations Between Dimensional Personality Profiles and Self-Destructive Behaviors.

Ongoing research is shifting towards a dimensional understanding of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Aim of this study was to identify personality profiles in BPD that are predictive of self-destructive behaviors. Personality traits were assessed (n = 130) according to the five-factor model of personality (i.e., Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) and an additional factor called Risk Preference. Self-destructive behavior parameters such as non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and other borderline typical dyscontrolled behaviors (e.g., drug abuse) were assessed by self-report measures. Canonical correlation analyses demonstrated that Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness are predictors of NSSI. Further, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and Risk Preference were associated with dyscontrolled behaviors. Our results add further support on personality-relevant self-destructive behaviors in BPD. A combined diagnostic assessment could offer clinically meaningful insights about the causes of self-destruction in BPD to expand current therapeutic repertoires.

fMRI correlates of jumping-to-conclusions in patients with delusions: Connectivity patterns and effects of metacognitive training.

Background: Reasoning biases such as the jumping-to-conclusions bias (JTC) are thought to contribute to delusions. Interventions targeting these biases such as metacognitive training (MCT) may improve delusions. So far, it is not clear whether JTC depends on dopaminergic reward areas that constitute the main action locus of antipsychotic drugs, or on additional cortical areas. The present study aimed to investigate fMRI activation and functional connectivity patterns underlying JTC, and their changes following MCT, in patients with delusions. Methods: Participants were 25 healthy individuals and 26 patients with current delusions who were either medication-free or on stable medication without sufficient response. We assessed (1) BOLD activity in the task-positive (TPN), task-negative (TNN), and subcortical reward network (RN); (2) Psychophysiological interactions (PPI) of peak activation areas. Results: Presence of JTC (irrespective of group) was associated with lower RN activity during conclusion events, and with increased effective connectivity between TPN and TNN during draw events. Following MCT, changes were observed in TPN activity and in effective connectivity of inferior parietal cortex (part of the TPN) with all three target networks. Conclusion: JTC is associated not only with reward system areas that constitute the main target of antipsychotic drugs, but also with cortical areas, particularly of the TPN.

The role of effective connectivity between the task-positive and task-negative network for evidence gathering [Evidence gathering and connectivity].

Reports linking a 'jumping-to-conclusions' bias to delusions have led to growing interest in the neurobiological correlates of probabilistic reasoning. Several brain areas have been implicated in probabilistic reasoning; however, findings are difficult to integrate into a coherent account. The present study aimed to provide additional evidence by investigating, for the first time, effective connectivity among brain areas involved in different stages of evidence gathering. We investigated evidence gathering in 25 healthy individuals using fMRI and a new paradigm (Box Task) designed such as to minimize the effects of cognitive effort and reward processing. Decisions to collect more evidence ('draws') were contrasted to decisions to reach a final choice ('conclusions') with respect to BOLD activity. Psychophysiological interaction analysis was used to investigate effective connectivity. Conclusion events were associated with extensive brain activations in widely distributed brain areas associated with the task-positive network. In contrast, draw events were characterized by higher activation in areas assumed to be part of the task-negative network. Effective connectivity between the two networks decreased during draws and increased during conclusion events. Our findings indicate that probabilistic reasoning may depend on the balance between the task-positive and task-negative network, and that shifts in connectivity between the two may be crucial for evidence gathering. Thus, abnormal connectivity between the two systems may significantly contribute to the jumping-to-conclusions bias.

Monocausal attribution and its relationship with reasoning biases in schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant attributional styles are counted to a set of circumscribed cognitive biases that are implicated in the pathogenesis of (paranoid) psychosis. However, evidence for a specific profile (e.g., an exaggerated self-serving bias, other-blaming bias) has become equivocal over the years. More recently, one-sided (monocausal) attributions have been reported in patients with psychosis. METHODS: We compared a large sample of patients with diagnosed schizophrenia (n=145) to nonclinical controls (n=30) on a revised version of the Internal, Personal and Situational Attributions Questionnaire (IPSAQ-R). In this task, participants have to assign probability estimates to each of three potential causes (i.e., myself, others, circumstances) for a specific (negative or positive) event. RESULTS: Participants with schizophrenia displayed an abolished self-serving bias and showed a significant preference for one-sided/monocausal attributions, which was neither correlated with jumping to conclusions nor overconfidence in errors. School education correlated with less monocausal attributions. We did not find any congruence between attributional styles with core delusional ideas. CONCLUSIONS: Our study corroborates earlier investigations showing that monocausal attributions may play a role in the pathogenesis of psychosis; this bias unlikely represents an epiphenomenon of established biases. Unexpectedly, attributional styles (e.g., external-blaming) did not shape delusional contents. The true prevalence of monocausal attributions in psychosis is perhaps underestimated in the study, as groups were equated on school education, which was correlated with monocausal attributions.

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.

Antipsychotics decrease response confidence.

Antipsychotics represent the first-choice treatment for schizophrenia. However, the cognitive and emotional pathways through which symptom reduction is achieved have remained unclear. We recently proposed that the induction of doubt is a core mechanism of action of antipsychotics. In the framework of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design, 39 nonclinical participants filled out a questionnaire tapping into cognitive and emotional changes (Effect of Antipsychotic Medication on Emotion and Cognition-revised (EAMEC-r)) each time they had received one of three substances (haloperidol, placebo, L-dopa). Participants reported more doubt under haloperidol than under L-dopa lending support to the theory that antipsychotics decrease delusional conviction via the reduction of confidence. Key points from this study are: (a) antipsychotics induce doubt, and (b) doubt may represent a core mechanism of action for the reduction of delusional ideas.

Investigating the efficacy of an individualized metacognitive therapy program (MCT+) for psychosis: study protocol of a multi-center randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychological interventions are increasingly recommended as adjunctive treatments for psychosis, but their implementation in clinical practice is still insufficient. The individualized metacognitive therapy program (MCT+; www.uke.de/mct_plus ) represents a low-threshold psychotherapeutic approach that synthesizes group metacognitive training (MCT) and cognitive behavioral therapy for psychosis, and addresses specific cognitive biases that are involved in the onset and maintenance of psychosis. It aims to "plant the seed of doubt" regarding rigid delusional convictions and to encourage patients to critically reflect, extend and change their approach to problem solving. Its second edition also puts more emphasis on affective symptoms. A recent meta-analysis of metacognitive interventions (MCT, MCT+) indicate small to moderate effects on positive symptoms and delusions, as well as high rates of acceptance. Nonetheless, no long-term studies of MCT+ involving large samples have been conducted. METHODS: The goal of the present multi-center, observer-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial is to compare the efficacy of MCT+ against an active control (cognitive remediation; MyBrainTraining(©)) in 328 patients with psychosis at three time points (baseline, immediately after intervention [6 weeks] and 6 months later). The primary outcome is change in psychosis symptoms over the 6-month follow-up period as assessed by the delusion subscale of the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes include jumping to conclusions, other positive symptoms of schizophrenia, depressive symptoms, self-esteem, quality of life, and cognitive insight. The study also seeks to elucidate mediating factors that promote versus impede symptom improvement across time. DISCUSSION: This is the first multi-center randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of individualized MCT+ in a large sample of patients with psychosis. The rationale for the trial, the design, and the strengths and limitations of the study are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered through the German Clinical Trials Register ( www.drks.de ) as DRKS00008001 . Registered 6 May 2015.

Dopamine effects on evidence gathering and integration.

BACKGROUND: Disturbances in evidence gathering and disconfirmatory evidence integration have been associated with the presence of or propensity for delusions. Previous evidence suggests that these 2 types of reasoning bias might be differentially affected by antipsychotic medication. We aimed to investigate the effects of a dopaminergic agonist (L-dopa) and a dopaminergic antagonist (haloperidol) on evidence gathering and disconfirmatory evidence integration after single-dose administration in healthy individuals. METHODS: The study used a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-way crossover design. Participants were healthy individuals aged 18-40 years. We administered a new data-gathering task designed to increase sensitivity to change compared with traditional tasks. The Bias Against Disconfirmatory Evidence (BADE) task was used as a measure of disconfirmatory evidence integration. RESULTS: We included 30 individuals in our study. In the data-gathering task, dopaminergic modulation had no significant effect on the amount of evidence gathered before reaching a decision. In contrast, the ability of participants to integrate disconfirmatory evidence showed a significant linear dopaminergic modulation pattern (highest with haloperidol, intermediate with placebo, lowest with L-dopa), with the difference between haloperidol and L-dopa marginally reaching significance. LIMITATIONS: Although the doses used for haloperidol and L-dopa were similar to those used in previous studies, drug plasma level measurements would have added to the validity of findings. CONCLUSION: Evidence gathering and disconfirmatory evidence integration might be differentially influenced by dopaminergic agents. Our findings are in support of a dual-disturbance account of delusions and provide a plausible neurobiological basis for the use of interventions targeted at improving reasoning biases as an adjunctive treatment in patients with psychotic disorders.