Susceptibility to misleading information under social pressure in schizophrenia

Implications of Online Self-Diagnosis in Psychiatry

Online self-diagnosis of psychiatric disorders by the general public is increasing. The reasons for the increase include the expansion of Internet technologies and the use of social media, the rapid growth of direct-to-consumer e-commerce in healthcare, and the increased emphasis on patient involvement in decision making. The publicity given to artificial intelligence (AI) has also contributed to the increased use of online screening tools by the general public. This paper aims to review factors contributing to the expansion of online self-diagnosis by the general public, and discuss both the risks and benefits of online self-diagnosis of psychiatric disorders. A narrative review was performed with examples obtained from the scientific literature and commercial articles written for the general public. Online self-diagnosis of psychiatric disorders is growing rapidly. Some people with a positive result on a screening tool will seek professional help. However, there are many potential risks for patients who self-diagnose, including an incorrect or dangerous diagnosis, increased patient anxiety about the diagnosis, obtaining unfiltered advice on social media, using the self-diagnosis to self-treat, including online purchase of medications without a prescription, and technical issues including the loss of privacy. Physicians need to be aware of the increase in self-diagnosis by the general public and the potential risks, both medical and technical. Psychiatrists must recognize that the general public is often unaware of the challenging medical and technical issues involved in the diagnosis of a mental disorder, and be ready to treat patients who have already obtained an online self-diagnosis.

The Return of the Repressed: The Persistent and Problematic Claims of Long-Forgotten Trauma

Can purely psychological trauma lead to a complete blockage of autobiographical memories? This long-standing question about the existence of repressed memories has been at the heart of one of the most heated debates in modern psychology. These so-called memory wars originated in the 1990s, and many scholars have assumed that they are over. We demonstrate that this assumption is incorrect and that the controversial issue of repressed memories is alive and well and may even be on the rise. We review converging research and data from legal cases indicating that the topic of repressed memories remains active in clinical, legal, and academic settings. We show that the belief in repressed memories occurs on a nontrivial scale (58%) and appears to have increased among clinical psychologists since the 1990s. We also demonstrate that the scientifically controversial concept of dissociative amnesia, which we argue is a substitute term for memory repression, has gained in popularity. Finally, we review work on the adverse side effects of certain psychotherapeutic techniques, some of which may be linked to the recovery of repressed memories. The memory wars have not vanished. They have continued to endure and contribute to potentially damaging consequences in clinical, legal, and academic contexts.

What Drives False Memories in Psychopathology? A Case for Associative Activation

In clinical and court settings, it is imperative to know whether posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression may make people susceptible to false memories. We conducted a review of the literature on false memory effects in participants with PTSD, a history of trauma, or depression. When emotional associative material was presented to these groups, their levels of false memory were raised relative to those in relevant comparison groups. This difference did not consistently emerge when neutral or nonassociative material was presented. Our conclusion is supported by a quantitative comparison of effect sizes between studies using emotional associative or neutral, nonassociative material. Our review suggests that individuals with PTSD, a history of trauma, or depression are at risk for producing false memories when they are exposed to information that is related to their knowledge base.

Unique and Overlapping Symptoms in Schizophrenia Spectrum and Dissociative Disorders in Relation to Models of Psychopathology: A Systematic Review

Schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSDs) and dissociative disorders (DDs) are described in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and tenth edition of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) as 2 categorically distinct diagnostic categories. However, several studies indicate high levels of co-occurrence between these diagnostic groups, which might be explained by overlapping symptoms. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the research concerning overlap and differences in symptoms between schizophrenia spectrum and DDs. For this purpose the PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant literature. The literature contained a large body of evidence showing the presence of symptoms of dissociation in SSDs. Although there are quantitative differences between diagnoses, overlapping symptoms are not limited to certain domains of dissociation, nor to nonpathological forms of dissociation. In addition, dissociation seems to be related to a history of trauma in SSDs, as is also seen in DDs. There is also evidence showing that positive and negative symptoms typically associated with schizophrenia may be present in DD. Implications of these results are discussed with regard to different models of psychopathology and clinical practice.