Cited by 255Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Context-processing deficits in schizophrenia: Diagnostic specificity, 4-week course, and relationships to clinical symptoms.

Barch, Deanna M., Carter, Cameron S., MacDonald, Angus W., Braver, Todd S., Cohen, Jonathan D.·2003·Journal of Abnormal Psychology

Abstract

Previous research on schizophrenia suggests that context-processing disturbances are one of the core cognitive deficits present in schizophia. However, it is not clear whether such deficits are specific to schizophrenia as compared with other psychotic disorders. To address this question, the authors administered a version of the AX Continuous Performance Test designed to assess context processing in a sample of healthy controls, patients with schizophrenia, and patients with other psychotic disorders. Participants were tested at index (when medication naive and experiencing their first contact with psychiatric services) and 4 weeks later, following medication treatment. At index, patients with schizophrenia and the psychotic comparison group demonstrated similar impairments in context processing. However, context-processing deficits improved in the psychotic comparison group at 4 weeks but did not improve in patients with schizophrenia.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-843x.112.1.132

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • People in the schizophrenia spectrum fail to develop this normal bias and do not have an increase in errors of commission with increased frequency of targets.

    “Interestingly, people in the schizophrenia spectrum fail to develop this normal bias and do not have an increase in errors of commission with increased frequency of targets. 34”

    From Domains of cognition and their assessment (2019) · cites this paper as [34]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., MacDonald, A. W., Braver, T. S., & Cohen, J. D.
Affiliations
Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
Published
2003-02
Volume
112
Issue
1
Pages
132-143
ISSN
  • 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1846
OpenAlex
W2151392566
Cited by
255
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 8
FWCI
12.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH47073, MH 45156, P50MH045156)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
schizophrenia, context processing, cognitive impairment, psychosis, diagnostic specificity, antipsychotic drugs, symptom improvement, first-episode psychosis
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychotic Disorders, Random Allocation, Reaction Time, Schizophrenia, Semantics, Sensitivity and Specificity, Antipsychotic Agents

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