Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, CA, USA.
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK; Director at in2gr8mentalhealth Ltd., London, UK.
J Affect Disord. 2021 Oct 1;293:305-313. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.06.035. Epub 2021 Jun 27.
According to Fuzzy-Trace Theory (FTT), qualitative, bottom-line, "gist" reasoning leads to less risk taking and more mature decision-making, less easily swayed by emotions than quantitative, detail-oriented, "verbatim" reasoning. In Bipolar disorder deleterious risky behaviors are common. Prior research confirmed the relationships posited between FTT and risk taking. We aim to understand whether FTT acts upon risk taking in the manner proposed in the FTT framework, namely, that (a) gist "values" mediate the role of "categorical gist". Furthermore, the roles of mania and impulsivity, cited as factors for risk-taking, remain to be clarified. In this study, we investigate if (b) manic symptoms and impulsivity moderate these relationships.
Participants (N = 105) completed an online survey including demographics, clinical variables, symptomatology, FTT, risk taking and risk perception.
Mediational models indicated that (a) Gist Values mediated Categorical Gist's effect on risk taking, as expected by the FTT framework. (b) Impulsivity moderates risk taking, but manic-type symptomatology does not.
Voluntary, self-report surveys may have low participant motivation and limit the diagnostic validity and the inpatient generalizability of the results.
The results move beyond a focus on mood-related aspects of Bipolar disorder and confirm the importance of understanding reasoning processes like FTT in combination with impulsivity, as potential behavioral factors of risk taking in Bipolar disorder. The clarifications on FTT's functioning as a mechanism prescribe possible openings for more efficacious reduction of risky behaviors through behavioral interventions focusing on value creation.
根据模糊痕迹理论（FTT），定性的、底线的、“要点”推理导致较少的风险承担和更成熟的决策，较少受到情绪的影响，而不是定量的、注重细节的、“逐字逐句”的推理。在双相情感障碍中，有害的冒险行为很常见。先前的研究证实了 FTT 与风险承担之间的关系。我们的目的是了解 FTT 是否按照 FTT 框架中提出的方式作用于风险承担，即（a）要点“价值”调解“类别要点”的作用。此外，作为冒险因素的躁狂和冲动的作用仍有待澄清。在这项研究中，我们调查是否（b）躁狂症状和冲动性调节这些关系。
参与者（N=105）完成了一项在线调查，包括人口统计学、临床变量、症状、FTT、风险承担和风险感知。
中介模型表明，（a）要点价值调解了类别要点对风险承担的影响，正如 FTT 框架所预期的那样。（b）冲动性调节风险承担，但躁狂型症状没有。
自愿、自我报告的调查可能会降低参与者的积极性，并限制结果的诊断有效性和住院患者的普遍性。
这些结果超越了对双相情感障碍中与情绪相关方面的关注，并证实了理解像 FTT 这样的推理过程的重要性，以及与冲动性相结合，作为双相情感障碍中风险承担的潜在行为因素。对 FTT 作为一种机制的作用的澄清为通过关注价值创造的行为干预更有效地减少风险行为提供了可能的途径。
