Cited by 12Action Observation and SynchronizationSchizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and Psychiatry

The second agent effect: interpersonal predictive coding in people with schizophrenia

Okruszek, Łukasz, Piejka, Aleksandra, Wysokiński, Adam, Szczepocka, Ewa, Manera, Valeria·2019·Social Neuroscience

Abstract

Interpersonal predictive coding (IPC) enables one to use the information conveyed by the communicative action of one agent to predict the response of another agent. IPC relies both on explicit reflective processes (processing of communicative intentions) and automatic reflexive processes (motor resonance). Predictive coding deficits may underlie positive symptoms in people with schizophrenia (SCZ), yet IPC has not been analyzed in SCZ. Thirty-nine SCZ and 22 controls (HC) completed a simultaneous masking detection task, during which they observed either communicative (Com) or individual (Ind) actions of agent A and had to report the presence of the agent B, who was shown in half of the trials. In line with previous findings, detection criterion was lowered after Com as compared to Ind, suggesting a higher tendency to report the presence of a second agent after observing agent A's communicative gestures . Surprisingly, this effect was found to a similar extent in both groups. Communicative criterion was linked to mentalizing abilities, but not to symptoms in SCZ. Finding that SCZ show similar IPC as HC adds to the previous evidence that reflexive processes may be relatively intact in patients. Furthermore, the level of reflective processes may be crucial for patients' social functioning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17470919.2017.1415969

Cites

29 of 29 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?

  • Individuals with SCZ could still leverage communicative gestures to predict the behavior of others, resulting in preserved social predictive coding.

    “Despite non-social predictive coding impairments, individuals with SCZ could still leverage communicative gestures to predict the behavior of others, resulting in preserved social predictive coding (Okruszek et al., 2018, 2019).”

    From Predictive coding in neuropsychiatric disorders: a systematic transdiagnostic review. (2025) · cites this paper as Okruszek et al., 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Okruszek, Ł., Piejka, A., Wysokiński, A., Szczepocka, E., & Manera, V.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Psychology (PL)
  • University of Warsaw (PL)
  • Medical University of Lodz (PL)
  • Spatio-Temporal Activity Recognition Systems Research team, INRIA, Sophia Antipolis, France
Corresponding author
Okruszek, Łukasz
Venue
Social Neuroscience
Published
2017-12-18
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
208-213
ISSN
  • 1747-0919 (ISSN-L)
  • 1747-0927
OpenAlex
W2775253956
Cited by
12
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2018: 2
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
schizophrenia, gestural communication, motor resonance, mentalization, positive symptoms, social cognition, reflexive processes, reflective processes, social functioning
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Schizophrenia, Social 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