You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The Metacognition Assessment Scale (MAS‐A): Results of a pilot study applying a German translation to individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1111/papt.12122 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna‐Lena Bröcker, Samuel Bayer, Frauke Stuke, Patrick Giemsa, Andreas Heinz, Felix Bermpohl, Paul H. Lysaker, Christiane Montag |
| Abstract |
Metacognition, the capacity 'to think about thinking' and thus to reflect and to master interpersonal problems on a mentalistic basis, is often impaired among patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and has been suggested as a potential treatment target. However, little is known about the reliability of its measurement and links with related phenomena. The aim of this study was to validate a German translation of the Metacognition Assessment Scale (MAS-A) as a measure to assess metacognition from free narratives of patients' personally relevant episodes and relationships. MAS-A was applied to narratives of 22 individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders together with self-ratings and behavioural tests of metacognitive and related functions such as mentalizing and emotional awareness. Multi-level modelling allowed to calculate inter-rater reliability (IRR) and inter-rater agreement (IRA) and to include test results as level-2 predictors of the aggregated scorings on the MAS-A subscales in order to explore convergent validity. After considering neurocognition and symptom scores as further predictors, aggregated scorings were correlated with psychosocial functioning. There were high IRRs and IRAs all over the ratings. None of the related measures accounted for variance in MAS-A scorings, indicating the existence of separable, non-overlapping constructs. Verbal memory and positive symptoms were significant predictors for MAS-A subscales. MAS-A, but no other measure, displayed significant associations with psychosocial functioning. MAS-A is a reliable expert rating to assess metacognition from patients' free narratives. Considering the link to psychosocial functioning, MAS-A appears to be a promising tool for the evaluation of metacognition. MAS-A is a reliable tool to evaluate metacognitive function from narratives about emotionally relevant topics and meaningful relationships. Metacognition appears separate from neighbouring constructs such as mentalizing, ToM, or emotional awareness. MAS-A scales are significantly predicted by verbal memory and positive symptoms. Only MAS-A scales display significant associations with psychosocial functioning, and it thus is a promising tool to evaluate metacognition in psychotherapy research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 82 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 17% |
| Unknown | 26 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 29 | 35% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 31 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 March 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice
#812
of 844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,198
of 322,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 844 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.