Cited by 47Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Metacognitive Capacity as a Predictor of Insight in First-Episode Psychosis

Vohs, Jenifer L., Lysaker, Paul H., Liffick, Emily, Francis, Michael M., Leonhardt, Bethany L., James, Alison, Buck, Kelly D., Hamm, Jay A. +3 more·2015·Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease

Abstract

Impaired insight is common in the first episode of psychosis (FEP). Although considerable research has examined the factors that are associated with impaired insight in chronic psychosis, less is known about the factors that underlie and sustain poor insight in FEP. Impaired metacognition, or the ability to form integrated representations of self and others, is a promising potential contributor to poor insight in FEP. To explore this possibility, the authors assessed insight and metacognition in 40 individuals with FEP and then examined the relationship between these areas and social cognition domains, neurocognitive domains, and psychotic symptoms. Correlation analyses revealed that improved insight was associated with higher metacognition, better vocabulary and Theory of Mind scores, and fewer symptoms. The domain of metacognitive mastery also predicted clinical insight. Results support the need to develop an integrative therapeutic approach focused on improving metacognition, hence addressing poor insight in FEP.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/nmd.0000000000000291

Cites

65 of 65 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vohs, J. L., Lysaker, P. H., Liffick, E., Francis, M. M., Leonhardt, B. L., James, A., Buck, K. D., Hamm, J. A., Minor, K. S., Mehdiyoun, N., & Breier, A.
Affiliations
  • Larue Carter Hospital (US)
  • Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center (US)
  • Indiana University School of Medicine (US)
  • Indiana State University (US)
  • Eskenazi Health (US)
  • Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (US)
Corresponding author
  • Vohs, Jenifer L.
  • Lysaker, Paul H.
  • Liffick, Emily
  • Francis, Michael M.
  • Leonhardt, Bethany L.
  • Mehdiyoun, Nikki
  • Breier, Alan
Venue
Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease
Published
2015-05
Volume
203
Issue
5
Pages
372-378
ISSN
0022-3018 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2326525708
Cited by
47
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3
FWCI
5.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
School of Medicine, Indiana University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
metacognition, insight, first-episode psychosis, theory of mind, social cognition, vocabulary, psychotic symptoms, self and other representations, therapeutic interventions
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Awareness, Chronic Disease, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Prognosis, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Self Concept, Statistics as Topic, Young Adult, Executive Function, Theory of Mind

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