It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Individuals with psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) represent a critical group for improving the understanding of vulnerability factors across the psychosis continuum. A growing body of literature has identified functional deficits associated with PLEs. However, it is unclear if such deficits purely reveal the underlying psychosis vulnerability or if they are also linked with comorbid anxiety symptoms. Although anxiety disorders are often associated with impairments in psychosis-risk, symptoms of anxiety may facilitate executive functioning in certain psychosis groups. The Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences was completed to assess psychosis-like symptoms in a total of 57 individuals, and its median score was used to categorize PLE groups (high-PLE = 24, low-PLE = 33). Anxiety symptoms were measured via the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and cognitive flexibility was measured by the Penn Conditional Exclusion Test. The high-PLE group endorsed more anxiety symptoms, demonstrated poorer accuracy and efficiency on the cognitive task, and made more perseverative errors compared to the low-PLE group. Within the high-PLE group, higher levels of anxiety symptoms were associated with better performance and less perseverative errors compared to individuals with lower levels of anxiety symptoms. Conversely, greater anxiety symptoms were associated with poorer performance in the low-PLE group. Taken together, these findings provide a preliminary support for a potential psychosis vulnerability × anxiety symptom interaction. Given the interest in the psychosis continuum and potential treatment implications, the present findings warrant replication efforts.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Northwestern University, Department of Psychology, Evanston, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507); Northwestern University, Department of Psychiatry, Chicago, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507)
2 Northwestern University, Department of Psychology, Evanston, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507); Northwestern University, Institute for Innovations in Developmental Sciences (DevSci), Evanston, Chicago, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507)
3 University of Illinois at Chicago, Department of Psychology, Chicago, USA (GRID:grid.185648.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 2175 0319)
4 Northwestern University, Department of Psychology, Evanston, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507); Northwestern University, Department of Psychiatry, Chicago, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507); Northwestern University, Institute for Innovations in Developmental Sciences (DevSci), Evanston, Chicago, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507); Northwestern University, Medical Social Sciences, Chicago, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507); Northwestern University, Institute for Policy Research (IPR), Chicago, USA (GRID:grid.16753.36) (ISNI:0000 0001 2299 3507)