Uneingeschränkter Zugang

Exploring a lay Gestalt of schizophrenia? A Danish background population’s explanations on why and how first-episode schizophrenia patients’ narratives were intuitively sensed as contextually inappropriate

Charlotte Petersen
Charlotte Petersen
   | 20. Nov. 2017
Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology's Cover Image
Über diesen Artikel
Vorheriger Artikel
Nächster Artikel
Zitieren
Article Category: research-article
Online veröffentlicht: 20. Nov. 2017
Seitenbereich: 64 - 76
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/sjcapp-2017-008
Schlüsselwörter
© 2017 Charlotte Petersen et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Background

Recent continental-phenomenological psychiatry emphasizes pragmatics or social and contextual inappropriateness as a core disorder of schizophrenia, which is potentially relevant to early identification and treatment.

Objective

However, there are hardly any studies that examine the background population’s sensitivity to inappropriateness in schizophrenia, even if “common” people, from a pragmatic perspective, are likely to be highly sensitive to cultural-conventional norms, including (in)appropriateness.

Method

One empirical evaluation of contextual (in)appropriateness in 10 narratives from first-episode schizophrenia patients and healthy controls, respectively, found that when a phenomenologically informed Danish population (n=157 high-school students; mean age, 18.5) was “blinded” to the control–patient status – that is, “anonymous” narratives of the wordless picture story Frog, Where Are You? – they consequently evaluated patient narratives as more inappropriate than appropriate and control narratives as more appropriate than inappropriate (significant with 0.007). Aiming to explore a potential pattern recognition, distinguishing patient from control narratives, the present study systematizes and discusses salient explanations from lay “experts” who almost consequently (80% to 100%) evaluated patient narratives as inappropriate and control narratives as appropriate (n=63 of 157).

Results

Explanations of inappropriateness concerned affective aspects (about how the patient felt or how the evaluators felt reading the narrative), formal aspects (about pauses, fluency, and brevity), and aspects about sense making (from lack of understanding to nonsense and strangeness).The background population may be sensitive to affective and formal inappropriateness, but only lay experts emphasize the lack of sense in the patients’ narratives.

Conclusion

Further studies might benefit from investigating whether early referrals from family, friends, or schoolteachers of their own accord thematize such inappropriateness aspects, and whether questionnaires targeting inappropriateness could be developed and used in the early identification of young people at risk.

eISSN:
2245-8875
Sprache:
Englisch
Zeitrahmen der Veröffentlichung:
Volume Open
Fachgebiete der Zeitschrift:
Medizin, Vorklinische Medizin, Grundlagenmedizin, andere
Zeitschrift RSS Feed