IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v9y2017i3p254-259.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do specific metacognitive training modules lead to specific cognitive changes among patients diagnosed with schizophrenia? A single module effectiveness pilot study

Author

Listed:
  • Joachim Kowalski
  • Daniel Pankowski
  • Michał Lew-Starowicz
  • Łukasz Gawęda

Abstract

Background and objectives: This study aimed to assess specific changes in cognitive biases and the efficacy of two individual metacognitive training (MCT) modules which target the jumping to conclusions bias and theory of mind deficits among people diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders.Methods: Thirty-one patients were randomly allocated to three groups: jumping to conclusions, theory of mind, and a control group. Paranoid ideation, jumping to conclusions, and theory of mind were assessed pre- and post-treatment.Results: There were no significant changes in paranoid ideation pre- and post-intervention in any group. There was a tendency towards a decrease in the jumping to conclusions bias in the corresponding group in comparison to the other two groups. There was a significant change in the theory of mind deficit in the corresponding group in comparison to the jumping to conclusions group, but not the control group.Conclusions: Our study tentatively suggests that a single module of MCT training based on theory of mind and jumping to conclusions may affect specific cognitive biases.

Suggested Citation

  • Joachim Kowalski & Daniel Pankowski & Michał Lew-Starowicz & Łukasz Gawęda, 2017. "Do specific metacognitive training modules lead to specific cognitive changes among patients diagnosed with schizophrenia? A single module effectiveness pilot study," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 254-259, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:9:y:2017:i:3:p:254-259
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2017.1300186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2017.1300186
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2017.1300186?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:9:y:2017:i:3:p:254-259. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.