↓ Skip to main content

Deconstructing the nature of episodic foresight deficits associated with chronic opiate use

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Clinical Psychology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
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.
Title
Deconstructing the nature of episodic foresight deficits associated with chronic opiate use
Published in
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, March 2016
DOI 10.1111/bjc.12110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly Mercuri, Gill Terrett, Phoebe E. Bailey, Julie D. Henry, Helen Valerie Curran, Peter G. Rendell

Abstract

Episodic foresight refers to the capacity to mentally travel forward in time and has been linked to a wide variety of important functional behaviours. Evidence has recently emerged that chronic opiate use is associated with deficits in this critical capacity and that these difficulties are not simply a secondary consequence of broader cognitive dysfunction. The current study aimed to better understand the circumstances in which chronic opiate users might be expected to have problems with episodic foresight, by addressing whether deficits reflect compromised scene construction, self-projection, or narrative ability. Thirty-five chronic opiate users and 35 demographically matched controls completed an imagination task in which they were instructed to imagine and provide descriptions of an atemporal event, a plausible, self-relevant future event, as well as complete a narrative task. These three imagination conditions systematically varied in their demands on scene construction, self-projection, and narrative ability. Consistent with prior literature, chronic opiate users exhibited reduced capacity for episodic foresight relative to controls. However, this study was the first to show that these difficulties were independent of capacity for scene construction and narration. Instead, a specific impairment in self-projection into the future appears to contribute to the problems with episodic foresight seen in this clinical group. Deficits in self-projection into the future may have important implications in therapeutic environments given that many relapse prevention strategies rely heavily on the ability to project oneself into an unfamiliar future, free of problem substance use. A reduced capacity for episodic foresight highlights the importance of refining current relapse prevention protocols that place significant demands for mental time travel into the future. Psychosocial treatments should focus on the attainment of more immediate or short-term goals. It is difficult to delineate the effects of specific substances given long-standing drug use history common to chronic opiate users. Conclusions relating to neurological functioning are speculative given the absence of neuroimaging data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 22 29%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Unspecified 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 15 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,761,503
of 25,500,206 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Clinical Psychology
#383
of 706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,223
of 315,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Clinical Psychology
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,500,206 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 315,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.