Cited by 45Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts

Altered self-recognition in patients with schizophrenia

Open access
Sandsten, Karl Erik, Nordgaard, Julie, Kjaer, Troels Wesenberg, Gallese, Vittorio, Ardizzi, Martina, Ferroni, Francesca, Petersen, Janne, Parnas, Josef·2020·Schizophrenia Research

Abstract

Self-alienation is a common characterization of various disturbing experiences in patients with schizophrenia. A vivid example comes from patient reports of not recognizing themselves when inspecting their specular image in the mirror. By applying the multisensory paradigm of the Enfacement Illusion, this study empirically addresses the specular Self-Other discrimination in patients with schizophrenia. 35 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and 35 healthy matched controls were enrolled in the study. Results found that the group of patients with schizophrenia had a significant skewed self-other discrimination towards the other at baseline. Furthermore, the effect of visuo-tactile stimulation on self-recognition in the schizophrenia patients was significantly altered after both synchronous and asynchronous stimulation compared to baseline. This contrasted with healthy controls which in line with earlier studies only had significantly different self-recognition after synchronous stimulation. The study thus suggests that patients with schizophrenia have deviations in their specular self-recognition compared to healthy controls. Moreover, that temporal factors in multisensory integration may contribute to alterations of self-related stimuli in patients with schizophrenia.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.schres.2020.01.022

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sandsten, K. E., Nordgaard, J., Kjaer, T. W., Gallese, V., Ardizzi, M., Ferroni, F., Petersen, J., & Parnas, J.
Affiliations
  • Region Zealand (DK)
  • University of Parma (IT)
  • Frederiksberg Hospital (DK)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Corresponding author
Sandsten, Karl Erik
Venue
Schizophrenia Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-04
Volume
218
Pages
116-123
ISSN
0920-9964 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3003543192
Cited by
44
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7
FWCI
4.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Region Zealand
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Keywords
schizophrenia, self-recognition
MeSH terms
Body Image, Humans, Illusions, Schizophrenia, Touch, Visual Perception, Touch Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review