↓ Skip to main content

A Study of Theory of Mind in Paranoid Schizophrenia: A Theory or Many Theories?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
A Study of Theory of Mind in Paranoid Schizophrenia: A Theory or Many Theories?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00432
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Scherzer, Edith Leveillé, André Achim, Emilie Boisseau, Emmanuel Stip

Abstract

Social cognitive psychologists (Frith, 1992; Hardy-Baylé et al., 2003) sought to explain the social problems and clarify the clinical picture of schizophrenia by proposing a model that relates many of the symptoms to a problem of metarepresentation, i.e., theory of mind (ToM). Given the differences in clinical samples and results between studies, and considering the wide range of what is considered to constitute ToM, one must ask if there a core function, or is ToM multifaceted with dissociable facets? If, there are dissociable dimensions or facets, which are affected in patients with paranoid schizophrenia? To answer these questions, a group of 21 individuals diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and 29 non-clinical control subjects, were tested on a battery of five different measures of ToM. The results confirmed that there was little difference in specificity of three of the tests in distinguishing between the clinical and non-clinical group, but there were important differences in the shared variance between the tests. Further analyses hint at two dimensions although a single factor with the same variance and the same contributing weights in both groups could explain the results. The deficits related to the attribution of cognitive and affective states to others inferred from available verbal and non-verbal information. Further analyses revealed that incorrect attributions of mental states including the attribution of threatening intentions to others, non-interpretative responses and incomplete answers, depending on the test of ToM.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 104 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 24%
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 10 10%
Other 9 9%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 20 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 48%
Neuroscience 7 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 26 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 November 2012.
All research outputs
#23,010,126
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#27,660
of 34,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,709
of 251,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#403
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 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 34,726 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. 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 251,300 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 481 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.