Next Article in Journal
Using the Social-Ecological Model to Understand the Current Perspective of Contraceptive Use in the United States: A Narrative Literature Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Gynecological Health Concerns in Women with Schizophrenia and Related Disorders: A Narrative Review of Recent Studies
Previous Article in Journal
The Association between Intimate Partner Violence, Depression and Influenza-like Illness Experienced by Pregnant Women in Australia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Perception of and Motivation for Physical Activity among Women with a History of Gestational Diabetes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Women
Volume 1
Issue 4
10.3390/women1040018
women-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Are There Gender Differences in Social Cognition in First-Episode Psychosis?

by
Marina Verdaguer-Rodríguez
1,2,
Raquel López-Carrilero
1,2,3,
Marta Ferrer-Quintero
1,2,3,4,
Helena García-Mieres
1,2,3,
Luciana Díaz-Cutraro
1,2,5,
Eva Grasa
3,6,7,
Esther Pousa
3,6,7,8,9,
Ester Lorente
3,10,
Irene Birulés
2,4,
Trinidad Peláez
2,3,
María Luisa Barrigón
11,
Isabel Ruiz-Delgado
12,
Fermín González-Higueras
13,
Jordi Cid
14,
Alfonso Gutiérrez-Zotes
3,15,
Daniel Cuadras
16,
Spanish Metacognition Group
†,
Ana Barajas
17,18,*,‡ and
Susana Ochoa
1,2,3,*,‡
1
Etiopatogènia i Tractament dels Trastorns Mentals Greus (MERITT), Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Santa Rosa 39-57, 08950 Esplugues de Llobregat, Spain
2
Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Doctor Antoni Pujadas 42, 08830 Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain
3
Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), 28029 Madrid, Spain
4
Social and Quantitative Psychology Department, University of Barcelona, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
5
Psychology Department, FPCEE Blanquerna, Universitat Ramon Llull, 08022 Barcelona, Spain
6
Department of Psychiatry, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica-Sant Pau (IIB-Sant Pau), Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, 08041 Barcelona, Spain
7
Departament de Psicologia Clínica i de la Salut, Facultat de Psicologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
8
Salut Mental Parc Taulí. Sabadell, Hospital Universitari, UAB Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Sabadell, 08208 Barcelona, Spain
9
Neuropsiquiatria i Addicions, Hospital del Mar. IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), 08003 Barcelona, Spain
10
Psychiatry Service, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain
11
Departamento de Psiquiatría, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, 41013 Sevilla, Spain
12
Unidad de Salud Mental Comunitaria Málaga Norte, UGC Salud Mental Carlos Haya, Servicio Andaluz de Salud, 29014 Málaga, Spain
13
Comunidad Terapéutica Jaén Servicio Andaluz de Salud, 23001 Jaén, Spain
14
Mental Health & Addiction Research Group, IdiBGi—Institut d’Assistencia Sanitària, 17119 Girona, Spain
15
Institut d’Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili (IISPV), Hospital Universitari Institut Pere Mata, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, 43206 Reus, Spain
16
Statistical Unit, Fundació Sant Joan de Déu, Esplugues de Llobregat, 08950 Barcelona, Spain
17
Serra Húnter Programme, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
18
Centre d’Higiene Mental Les Corts, Department of Research, 08029 Barcelona, Spain
 
add Show full affiliation list
 
remove Hide full affiliation list
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Membership of the Spanish Metacognition Study Group is provided in the Acknowledgments.
‡
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Women 2021, 1(4), 204-211; https://doi.org/10.3390/women1040018
Submission received: 22 September 2021 / Revised: 13 October 2021 / Accepted: 15 October 2021 / Published: 20 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in Women 2021)
Versions Notes

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explore gender differences in social cognition in a sample of first-episode psychosis (FEP). An observational descriptive study was performed with 191 individuals with FEP. Emotion perception was assessed using the Faces Test, theory of mind was assessed using the Hinting Task, and attributional style was assessed using the Internal, Personal and Situational Attributions Questionnaire. No gender differences were found in any of the social cognitive domains. Our results suggest that men and women with FEP achieve similar performances in social cognition. Therefore, targeting specific needs in social cognition regarding gender may not be required in early interventions for psychosis.

1. Introduction

One of the core features of psychosis is the impairment of social cognition. Deficits in social cognition translate to difficulties in several mental processes, encompassing emotion processing and recognition, theory of mind, attributional style, and social perception [1,2,3,4]. Impairments in social cognition are already evident in first-episode psychosis (FEP) [5]. Previous studies suggest that people with FEP have an impaired performance in theory of mind [6,7], facial emotion identification [7] and facial emotion recognition [8,9].
The current evidence regarding gender differences in social cognition in psychosis shows inconsistent results. On one hand, some studies suggest that women with schizophrenia have better emotion processing capabilities than men [10,11], the same as in a healthy population [12]. However, other authors did not find gender differences in emotion processing in patients with schizophrenia [12,13,14]. Interestingly, although Weiss et al. [14] reported a similar emotion recognition performance in both genders, they observed gender differences in the patterns of error in emotion recognition of neutral faces. Men with psychosis tend to misinterpret neutral faces as angry, while women interpret them more frequently as sad [14]. On the other hand, some studies have reported a better theory of mind performance in women with schizophrenia [15], while others report no significant differences [13]. Of note, research focusing on people with FEP has not reported gender differences in emotion processing and theory of mind [16,17,18,19]. Regarding attributional style, Pinkham et al. [4] reported no gender differences in a sample of people with established schizophrenia. To our knowledge, no studies have explored gender differences in FEP in attributional style.
Considering the inconsistency of the evidence to date, we believe examining gender differences in social cognition in FEP is of particular importance. The clinical implications of improving social cognitive abilities are relevant, as they have been associated with improvements in other main outcomes. For instance, a better emotion processing performance has been correlated with lower levels of positive symptoms, impulsiveness and aggression, and more satisfactory social interactions [9]. Significant associations have also been found between emotion processing and social perception, neurocognitive domains [20], and social and community functioning [21,22,23,24,25]. Moreover, social cognition seems to act as a mediator between neurocognition and functioning [26]. Therefore, a better understanding of how social cognition works, and whether it works differently in men and women with FEP, may help clarify the need to tailor early interventions based on gender.
The aim of this study was to further explore gender-related differences in social cognition in FEP. In light of the amount of evidence showing no gender differences in social cognitive domains in FEP, we expect to find a similar performance in emotion processing and theory of mind between women and men. Due to the lack of previous research, we do not establish any hypothesis regarding gender differences in attributional style.

2. Results

A total of 191 individuals with FEP were included in the analysis (62 women). Table 1 shows sociodemographic and clinical variables of the sample, according to gender. Women were significantly older than men and had a higher education level. Men and women differed significantly in diagnosis. Schizophrenia was more common in men than in women, while women were diagnosed more often with other psychotic disorders, such as schizoaffective disorder, delusional disorder, brief psychotic disorder, schizophreniform disorder, and a psychotic disorder not otherwise specified. Women scored significantly higher in the PANSS depression factor.
As seen in Table 2, no significant gender differences were found in any variable of social cognition. We performed an ANCOVA to control for sociodemographic and clinical variables in which we found significant gender differences (Table 1). Follow-up ANCOVAS confirmed that there is no significant effect of gender on social cognitive measures after controlling for the effect of age, depression (PANSS depression Emsley factor), education level, and diagnosis.

3. Discussion

In line with our hypothesis, we did not find gender differences in any social cognitive domain, even when controlling for variables such as age, depression, education level and diagnosis.
Women and men performed similarly in emotion processing. This finding is consistent with previous studies that report no significant gender differences in facial and prosodic emotion recognition in FEP [16,18,19]. Nevertheless, contrary to our findings, Navarra-Ventura et al. [19] reported a trend in emotion recognition scores, suggesting that an advantage of women over men with FEP should be considered. In accordance with previous studies, we did not observe significant gender differences in the theory of mind in FEP [17,18,19]. To our knowledge, this is the first study exploring gender differences in attributional style in people with FEP. We did not find significant gender differences in attributional style, either in externalizing or personalizing biases. Given the paucity of previous studies, further research is required to better establish these results.
Earlier studies report the presence of gender differences in social cognition in more advanced stages of psychosis. Some authors identified that women with established schizophrenia had a better emotion processing capacity [10,11] and theory of mind [15] than their male counterparts. Moreover, previous research shows that women in non-clinical samples have a significantly better ability in some social cognitive domains, such as emotion processing [12]. Considering the aforementioned evidence regarding the absence of gender differences in FEP [16,17,18,19], which is in line with our results, it could be suggested that the impairment in emotion processing and theory of mind may develop differently in men than in women, depending on the stage of the disorder. On the one hand, women with FEP may experience a greater impairment, losing the advantage they showed before the onset of the disorder. On the other hand, it could be that men undergo a more profound impairment as the disorder progresses to a more advanced stage. However, this should be interpreted with caution, given that other studies have not detected gender differences in emotion recognition [12,13,14] or theory of mind [13] in established schizophrenia. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine how the disorder develops over time regarding gender.
Although many studies do not reveal gender differences in social cognition in FEP, some authors have reported that men and women with FEP show distinct outcomes in interventions targeting social cognition. For instance, Salas-Sender et al. [27] showed a reduction in the personalizing bias scores in women with FEP, but not in men, after metacognitive training. A possible explanation for this might be that mediating factors exist between gender and social cognition. It has been reported that neurocognition [28,29], metacognition [30] or social functioning [31] are mediating factors of social cognition. Moreover, previous studies have found that gender differences are present in these variables [17,18,32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. Further research is required to better understand whether men and women with FEP have distinct pathways to social cognitive improvements after social cognitive treatments.
Some limitations to this study need to be acknowledged. First, we did not have a control group, so we could not compare our findings with those of a healthy population. Therefore, further studies may include a sample of matched controls, to explore whether people with FEP are more impaired than healthy controls, and to explore if there are gender differences in social cognition in a healthy population. Second, the cross-sectional design did not provide information about how gender differences in social cognition may evolve over time. Despite its exploratory nature, this study offers some insight into the mixed results found to date. Given the paucity of evidence on this matter, further research is needed to clarify the role of gender in social cognition in FEP.
A relevant clinical implication can be identified in the current study. Previous research has shown that impairment in social cognition is greater in people with FEP than in a healthy population [6,7,8]. This clearly indicates the importance of including social cognition in early interventions for psychosis. Given that men and women with FEP seem to have a similar level of impairment in social cognition, interventions tailored by gender may not be necessary in early stages of the disorder. In addition, future studies should take into consideration the presence of higher depressive symptoms in women with FEP, in order to better adapt the interventions on this matter.

4. Materials and Methods

A descriptive study was performed based on the baseline data of two multicentric clinical trials registered under NCT02340559 and NCT04429412.
The sample consisted of 191 participants with FEP, that is, participants less than 5 years from the onset of psychotic symptoms [39]. Referent mental health professionals recruited patients from one of the following mental health centers: Hospital Clínic de Valencia, Servicio Andaluz de Salud de Jaén, Servicio Andaluz de Salud de Granada, Servicio Andaluz de Salud de Málaga, Institut Pere Mata (Reus), Institut d’Assistència Sanitària (Girona), Associació Centre d’Higiene Mental Les Corts (Barcelona), Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Barcelona), Hospital del Mar (Barcelona), Corporació Sanitària Parc Taulí, and Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu (Sant Boi, coordinating center).
Inclusion criteria were: (1) a diagnosis of schizophrenia, psychotic disorder not otherwise specified, delusional disorder, schizoaffective disorder, brief psychotic disorder, or schizophreniform disorder, according to DSM-IV-TR; (2) <5 years from the onset of symptoms; (3) PANSS scores of ≥3 in items Delusions, Grandiosity, or Suspiciousness, in the last year; (4) age between 16 and 50. Exclusion criteria included: (1) traumatic brain injury, dementia, or intellectual disability (premorbid IQ ≤ 70); (2) substance dependence, according to DSM-IV-TR; (3) PANSS scores of ≥5 in Hostility and Uncooperativeness items, and of ≥6 in Suspiciousness.
Experienced researchers received the required training to assess the participants of the study, and the agreement in the assessment was satisfactory [40].
Sociodemographic questionnaire: We included a sociodemographic questionnaire to collect descriptive information of the sample. We transformed data from antipsychotic treatment to olanzapine defined daily dose [41].
Social cognition: Emotional processing was assessed using the Faces Test [42,43], in which higher scores indicate a better emotional recognition capacity (scores 0–20). The Cronbach’s alpha of the Faces Test was 0.75 [43]. Theory of mind was assessed using the Hinting Task [44,45], in which lower scores indicate worse performance. The Cronbach’s alpha of the Hinting Task was 0.69 [45]. Attributional style was assessed using the Internal, Personal and Situational Attributions Questionnaire (IPSAQ) [46,47], including the externalizing and personalizing bias subscales. Positive scores in externalizing bias indicate a stronger self-serving bias. Scores higher than 0.5 in personalizing bias denote a bigger proportion of external personal attributions for negative events, compared to situational attributions. The Cronbach’s alpha was 0.719 for the externalizing bias and 0.761 for the personalizing bias [46].
Clinical measures: Psychopathology was assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) [48,49]. Higher scores indicate greater severity of symptoms. We used the Emsley 7-factor solution [50] to evaluate negative, positive, disorganized, excited, motor symptoms, depression, and anxiety. Clinical insight was assessed using the Spanish version of the Scale to Assess Unawareness in Mental Disorders (SUMD) [51,52], in which higher scores indicate more unawareness (scores 3–15).
Functional outcomes: Global and clinical functioning were assessed using the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) [53]. Higher scores indicate better functioning (scores 1–100).
We used the SPSS Statistics Program (v22). We used the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test to verify the normal distribution of the data. We used the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U test to analyze continuous variables. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-square test. The Effect sizes of the comparison between genders were analyzed using the Cohen’s d. We performed an ANCOVA, adjusting for age, depression (PANSS depression Emsley factor) and education level as covariates, and diagnosis as a fixed factor. Due to the exploratory nature of the present study, we did not include multiple comparison corrections [54,55].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.V.-R., A.B. and S.O.; methodology, M.V.-R., A.B. and S.O.; validation, A.B. and S.O.; formal analysis, M.V.-R., M.F.-Q., D.C.; investigation, M.V.-R.; resources, R.L.-C., H.G.-M., M.F.-Q., L.D.-C., E.G., E.P., E.L., I.B., T.P., M.L.B., I.R.-D., F.G.-H., J.C., A.G.-Z. and Spanish Metacognition Group; data curation, R.L.-C.; writing—original draft preparation, M.V.-R.; writing—review and editing, M.V.-R., R.L.-C., H.G.-M., M.F.-Q., L.D.-C., I.B., M.L.B., A.B., S.O.; visualization, M.V.-R.; supervision, A.B. and S.O.; project administration, S.O.; funding acquisition, S.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Spanish Government, PI11/01347, PI14/00044, and PI18/00212) by the Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), Health Department of Catalonia, PERIS call (SLT006/17/00231), Progress and Health Foundation of the Andalusian Regional Ministry of Health, grant PI-0634/2011 and PI-0193/ 2014, Obra Social La Caixa (RecerCaixa call 2013), CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya, Obra Social Sant Joan de Déu (BML) and by FI19/00062 (Ayudas para la contratación de personal predoctoral, Luciana Díaz-Cutraro is a beneficiary of a Predoctoral Training Grant in Health Research).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research and Ethics Committees of Sant Joan de Déu (protocol code PIC-73-11 and date of approval 22 November 2011).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request due to restrictions, e.g., privacy or ethical. The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. Our institution is working on a repository of data.

Acknowledgments

We thank all the volunteers for their remarkable contribution. Spanish Metacognition Study Group (SMSG): Acevedo A., Anglès J., Argany M.A., Barajas A., Barrigón M.L., Beltrán M., Birulés I., Bogas J.L., Camprubí N., Carbonero M., Carmona Farrés C., Carrasco E., Casañas R., Cid J., Conesa E., Corripio I., Cortes P., Crosas J.M., de Apraiz A., Delgado M., Domínguez L., Escartí M.J., Escudero A., Esteban Pinos I., Figueras M., Franco C., García C., Gil V., Giménez-Díaz D., Gonzalez-Casares R., González Higueras F., González-Montoro M.L, González E., Grasa Bello E., Guasp A., Huerta-Ramos Mª E., Huertas P., Jiménez-Díaz A., Lalucat L.L., Llacer B., López-Alcayada R., López-Carrilero R., Lorente E., Luengo A., Mantecón N., Mas-Expósito L., Montes M., Moritz S., Murgui E., Nuñez M., Ochoa S., Palomer E., Paniego E., Peláez T., Pérez V., Planell K., Planellas C., Pleguezuelo-Garrote P., Pousa E., Rabella M., Renovell M., Rubio R., Ruiz-Delgado I., San Emeterio M., Sánchez E., Sanjuán J., Sans B., Schilling L., Sió H., Teixidó M., Torres P., Vila M.A., Vila-Badia R., Villegas F., Villellas R.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Savla, G.N.; Vella, L.; Armstrong, C.C.; Penn, D.L.; Twamley, E.W. Deficits in Domains of Social Cognition in Schizophrenia: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence. Schizophr. Bull. 2012, 39, 979–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  2. Pinkham, A.E.; Penn, D.L.; Green, M.F.; Buck, B.; Healey, K.; Harvey, P.D. The Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation Study: Results of the Expert Survey and RAND Panel. Schizophr. Bull. 2013, 40, 813–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  3. Pinkham, A.E.; Penn, D.L.; Green, M.F.; Harvey, P.D. Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation: Results of the Initial Psychometric Study. Schizophr. Bull. 2016, 42, 494–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  4. Pinkham, A.; Harvey, P.D.; Penn, D.L. Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation: Results of the Final Validation Study. Schizophr. Bull. 2017, 44, 737–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  5. Green, M.F.; Horan, W.P.; Lee, J. Nonsocial and social cognition in schizophrenia: Current evidence and future directions. World Psychiatry 2019, 18, 146–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  6. Bora, E.; Pantelis, C. Theory of mind impairments in first-episode psychosis, individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis and in first-degree relatives of schizophrenia: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Schizophr. Res. 2013, 144, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  7. Healey, K.M.; Bartholomeusz, C.F.; Penn, D.L. Deficits in social cognition in first episode psychosis: A review of the literature. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2016, 50, 108–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  8. Barkl, S.J.; Lah, S.; Harris, A.; Williams, L.M. Facial emotion identification in early-onset and first-episode psychosis: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Schizophr. Res. 2014, 159, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  9. Kuharic, D.B.; Makaric, P.; Kekin, I.; Lovrencic, I.L.; Savic, A.; Ostojic, D.; Silic, A.; Brecic, P.; Bajic, Z.; Kuzman, M.R. Differences in Facial Emotional Recognition Between Patients With the First-Episode Psychosis, Multi-episode Schizophrenia, and Healthy Controls. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 2019, 25, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  10. Erol, A.; Putgul, G.; Kosger, F.; Ersoy, B. Facial Emotion Recognition in Schizophrenia: The Impact of Gender. Psychiatry Investig. 2013, 10, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  11. Vaskinn, A.; Sundet, K.; Friis, S.; Simonsen, C.; Birkenæs, A.B.; Engh, J.A.; Jónsdóttir, H.; Ringen, P.A.; Opjordsmoen, S.; Andreassen, O.A. The effect of gender on emotion perception in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 2007, 116, 263–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  12. Petrovic, S.A.; Jerotic, S.; Mihaljevic, M.; Pavlovic, Z.; Ristic, I.; Soldatovic, I.; Maric, N. Sex differences in facial emotion recognition in health and psychotic disorders. Cogn. Neuropsychiatry 2019, 24, 108–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Pinkham, A.E.; Kelsven, S.; Kouros, C.; Harvey, P.D.; Penn, D.L. The Effect of Age, Race, and Sex on Social Cognitive Performance in Individuals With Schizophrenia. J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 2017, 205, 346–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  14. Weiss, E.M.; Kohler, C.G.; Brensinger, C.M.; Bilker, W.B.; Loughead, J.; Delazer, M.; Nolan, K.A. Gender differences in facial emotion recognition in persons with chronic schizophrenia. Eur. Psychiatry 2007, 22, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  15. Abu-Akel, A.; Bo, S. Superior mentalizing abilities of female patients with schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res. 2013, 210, 794–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  16. Amminger, G.P.; Schäfer, M.R.; Klier, C.M.; Schlögelhofer, M.; Mossaheb, N.; Thompson, A.; Bechdolf, A.; Allott, K.; McGorry, P.D.; Nelson, B. Facial and vocal affect perception in people at ultra-high risk of psychosis, first-episode schizophrenia and healthy controls. Early Interv. Psychiatry 2012, 6, 450–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  17. Ayesa-Arriola, R.; Rodriguez-Sanchez, J.M.; Gomez-Ruiz, E.; Roiz-Santiáñez, R.; Reeves, L.L.; Crespo-Facorro, B. No sex differences in neuropsychological performance in first episode psychosis patients. Prog. Neuro-Psychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry 2014, 48, 149–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  18. Danaher, H.; Allott, K.; Killackey, E.; Hester, R.; Cotton, S. An examination of sex differences in neurocognition and social cognition in first-episode psychosis. Psychiatry Res. 2018, 259, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  19. Ventura, G.N.; Fernandez-Gonzalo, S.; Turon, M.; Pousa, E.; Palao, D.; Cardoner, N.; Jodar, M. Gender Differences in Social Cognition: A Cross-Sectional Pilot Study of Recently Diagnosed Patients with Schizophrenia and Healthy Subjects. Can. J. Psychiatry 2017, 63, 538–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  20. Ventura, J.; Wood, R.C.; Jimenez, A.M.; Hellemann, G.S. Neurocognition and symptoms identify links between facial recognition and emotion processing in schizophrenia: Meta-analytic findings. Schizophr. Res. 2013, 151, 78–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  21. Bordon, N.; O’Rourke, S.; Hutton, P. The feasibility and clinical benefits of improving facial affect recognition impairments in schizophrenia: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Schizophr. Res. 2017, 188, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Irani, F.; Seligman, S.; Kamath, V.; Kohler, C.; Gur, R.C. A meta-analysis of emotion perception and functional outcomes in schizophrenia. Schizophr. Res. 2012, 137, 203–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  23. Horan, W.P.; Green, M.F.; DeGroot, M.; Fiske, A.; Hellemann, G.; Kee, K.; Kern, R.S.; Lee, J.; Sergi, M.J.; Subotnik, K.L.; et al. Social Cognition in Schizophrenia, Part 2: 12-Month Stability and Prediction of Functional Outcome in First-Episode Patients. Schizophr. Bull. 2011, 38, 865–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  24. McCleery, A.; Lee, J.; Fiske, A.P.; Ghermezi, L.; Hayata, J.N.; Hellemann, G.S.; Horan, W.P.; Kee, K.S.; Kern, R.S.; Knowlton, B.J.; et al. Longitudinal stability of social cognition in schizophrenia: A 5-year follow-up of social perception and emotion processing. Schizophr. Res. 2016, 176, 467–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  25. Pinkham, A.E.; Penn, D.L.; Perkins, D.O.; Graham, K.A.; Siegel, M. Emotion perception and social skill over the course of psychosis: A comparison of individuals “at-risk” for psychosis and individuals with early and chronic schizophrenia spectrum illness. Cogn. Neuropsychiatry 2007, 12, 198–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  26. Schmidt, S.J.; Mueller, D.R.; Roder, V. Social Cognition as a Mediator Variable Between Neurocognition and Functional Outcome in Schizophrenia: Empirical Review and New Results by Structural Equation Modeling. Schizophr. Bull. 2011, 37, S41–S54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  27. Salas-Sender, M.; López-Carrilero, R.; Barajas, A.; Lorente-Rovira, E.; Pousa, E.; Barrigón, M.L.; Grasa, E.; Ruiz-Delgado, I.; González-Higueras, F.; Cid, J.; et al. Gender differences in response to metacognitive training in people with first-episode psychosis. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 2020, 88, 516–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  28. Hoe, M.; Nakagami, E.; Green, M.F.; Brekke, J.S. The causal relationships between neurocognition, social cognition and functional outcome over time in schizophrenia: A latent difference score approach. Psychol. Med. 2012, 42, 2287–2299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  29. Peña, J.; Ibarretxe-Bilbao, N.; Sánchez, P.; Uriarte, J.; Elizagarate, E.; Gutierrez, M.; Ojeda, N. Mechanisms of functional improvement through cognitive rehabilitation in schizophrenia. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2018, 101, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  30. González-Blanch, C.; Birulés, I.; Pousa, E.; Barrigon, M.L.; López-Carrilero, R.; Lorente-Rovira, E.; Ayesa-Arriola, R.; Setien-Suero, E.; Barajas, A.; Grasa, E.M.; et al. Moderators of cognitive insight outcome in metacognitive training for first-episode psychosis. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2021, 141, 104–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  31. Eack, S.M.; Pogue-Geile, M.F.; Greenwald, D.P.; Hogarty, S.S.; Keshavan, M.S. Mechanisms of functional improvement in a 2-year trial of cognitive enhancement therapy for early schizophrenia. Psychol. Med. 2010, 41, 1253–1261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  32. Buck, G.; Lavigne, K.M.; Makowski, C.; Joober, R.; Malla, A.; Lepage, M. Sex Differences in Verbal Memory Predict Functioning Through Negative Symptoms in Early Psychosis. Schizophr. Bull. 2020, 46, 1587–1595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  33. Ittig, S.; Studerus, E.; Papmeyer, M.; Uttinger, M.; Koranyi, S.; Ramyead, A.; Riecher-Rössler, A. Sex Differences in Cognitive Functioning in At-Risk Mental State for Psychosis, First Episode Psychosis and Healthy Control Subjects. Eur. Psychiatry 2015, 30, 242–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  34. Pu, C.; Qiu, Y.; Zhou, T.; Yang, F.; Lu, Z.; Wang, C.-Y.; Deng, H.; Zhao, J.; Shi, C.; Yu, X. Gender differences of neurocognitive functioning in patients with first-episode schizophrenia in China. Compr. Psychiatry 2019, 95, 152132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  35. Penney, D.; Joober, R.; Malla, A.; Lepage, M. Understanding sex differences in cognitive insight across first-and-multiple episode psychosis. Schizophr. Res. 2020, 218, 276–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  36. Rietschel, L.; Lambert, M.; Karow, A.; Zink, M.; Müller, H.; Heinz, A.; De Millas, W.; Janssen, B.; Gaebel, W.; Schneider, F.; et al. Clinical high risk for psychosis: Gender differences in symptoms and social functioning. Early Interv. Psychiatry 2015, 11, 306–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  37. Van der Ven, E.; Scodes, J.; Basarba, C.; Pauselli, L.; Mascayano, F.; Nossel, I.; Bello, I.; Humensky, J.; Susser, E.; Wall, M.; et al. Trajectories of occupational and social functioning in people with recent-onset non-affective psychosis enrolled in specialized early intervention services across New York state. Schizophr. Res. 2020, 222, 218–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  38. Cotton, S.; Lambert, M.; Schimmelmann, B.; Foley, D.; Morley, K.; McGorry, P.; Conus, P. Gender differences in premorbid, entry, treatment, and outcome characteristics in a treated epidemiological sample of 661 patients with first episode psychosis. Schizophr. Res. 2009, 114, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  39. Breitborde, N.J.K.; Srihari, V.; Woods, S.W. Review of the operational definition for first-episode psychosis. Early Interv. Psychiatry 2009, 3, 259–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  40. Ochoa, S.; López-Carrilero, R.; Barrigón, M.L.; Pousa, E.; Barajas, A.; Lorente-Rovira, E.; González-Higueras, F.; Grasa, E.; Ruiz-Delgado, I.; Cid, J.; et al. Randomized control trial to assess the efficacy of metacognitive training compared with a psycho-educational group in people with a recent-onset psychosis. Psychol. Med. 2017, 47, 1573–1584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  41. Leucht, S.; Samara, M.; Heres, S.; Davis, J.M. Dose Equivalents for Antipsychotic Drugs: The DDD Method: Table 1. Schizophr. Bull. 2016, 42, S90–S94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  42. Baron-Cohen, S.; Wheelwright, S.; Jolliffe, A.T. Is There a “Language of the Eyes”? Evidence from Normal Adults, and Adults with Autism or Asperger Syndrome. Vis. Cogn. 1997, 4, 311–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  43. Huerta-Ramos, E.; Ferrer-Quintero, M.; Gómez-Benito, J.; González-Higueras, F.; Cuadras, D.; Del Rey-Mejías, A.L.; Usall, J.; Ochoa, S. Translation and validation of Baron Cohen’s face test in a general population from Spain. Acta Esp. Psiquiatr. 2021, 49, 106–113. [Google Scholar]
  44. Corcoran, R.; Mercer, G.; Frith, C.D. Schizophrenia, symptomatology and social inference: Investigating “theory of mind” in people with schizophrenia. Schizophr. Res. 1995, 17, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  45. Gil, D.; Fernández-Modamio, M.; Bengochea, R.; Arrieta, M. Adaptación al español de la prueba de teoría de la mente. Rev. Psiquiatr. Salud Ment. 2012, 5, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  46. Kinderman, P.; Bentall, R.P. A new measure of causal locus: The internal, personal and situational attributions questionnaire. Pers. Individ. Differ. 1996, 20, 261–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  47. Díez-Alegría, C.; Vázquez-Valverde, C. Teorías Cognitivas de las creencias delirantes. Apunt. Psicol. 2006, 24, 51–82. [Google Scholar]
  48. Kay, S.R.; Fiszbein, A.; Opler, L.A. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) for Schizophrenia. Schizophr. Bull. 1987, 13, 261–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  49. Martín, V.P.; Zorita, M.J.C. Validation of positive and negative symptom scale (PANSS) in a sample of Spanish schizophrenic patients. Actas Luso-Esp. Neurol. Psiquiatr. Cienc. Afines 1994, 22, 171–177. [Google Scholar]
  50. Emsley, R.; Rabinowitz, J.; Torreman, M. The factor structure for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) in recent-onset psychosis. Schizophr. Res. 2003, 61, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  51. Amador, F.; Strauss, D.H.; Yale, S.A.; Flaum, M.M.; Endicott, J.; Gorman, J.M. Assessment of Insight in Psychosis. Am. J. Psychiatry 1993, 150, 873–879. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  52. Ruiz, A.I.; Pousa, E.; Duno, R.; Coras, J.M.; Cuppa, S.; Garcia-Ribera, C. Adaptación al español de la escala de valoración de la no conciencia de trastorno mental (SUMD). Actas Españolas Psiquiatr. 2008, 36, 111–119. [Google Scholar]
  53. Endicott, J.; Spitzer, R.L.; Fleiss, J.L.; Cohen, J. The global assessment scale. A procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 1976, 33, 766–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  54. Bender, R.; Lange, S. Adjusting for multiple testing—When and how? J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2001, 54, 343–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  55. Nakagawa, S. A farewell to Bonferroni: The problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav. Ecol. 2004, 15, 1044–1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Table 1. Description of sociodemographic and clinical variables of the sample regarding gender.
Table 1. Description of sociodemographic and clinical variables of the sample regarding gender.
Men
(n = 129)		Women
(n = 62)		Statistic
(U-MW/X2)		p-ValueCohen’s d95% CI
LLUL
Mean (SD)Mean (SD)
Age (years)26.78 (6.79)30.18 (7.91)2.844 a0.004 *−0.473−0.779−0.166
Education level (%) 12.124 b0.032 *
Incomplete primary education10.9%4.8%
Complete primary education17.1%14.5%
Incomplete secondary education24.0%16.1%
Complete secondary education30.2%24.2%
Incomplete superior education7.8%16.1%
Complete superior education10.1%24.2%
Diagnosis (DSM-IV-TR) (%) 8.746 b0.003 *
Schizophrenia46.5%24.2%
Other psychotic disorders53.5%75.8%
Antipsychotic dose (DDD Olanzapine)20.13 (47.20)21.37 (55.71)−1.416 a0.157−0.248−0.3510.301
PANSS Emsley factors
Negative15.94 (6.97)14.28 (6.43)−1.582 a0.1140.244−0.0630.550
Positive16.42 (6.36)15.67 (15.93)−0.693 a0.4890.120−0.1860.425
Disorganized8.52 (3.71)7.98 (3.60)−1.395 a0.1630.145−0.1630.453
Excited5.62 (2.65)5.27 (2.79)−1.105 a0.2690.129−0.1750.433
Motor2.89 (1.49)2.73 (1.23)−0.309 a0.7580.116−0.1890.420
Depression4.47 (2.24)5.26 (2.48)2.048 a0.041 *−0.339−0.664−0.033
Anxiety5.89 (2.25)5.77 (2.50)−0.613 a0.5400.050−0.2540.353
GAF78.74 (12.46)59.41 (11.99)0.211 a0.833−0.054−0.3600.251
SUMD (global)5.89 (3.59)5.33 (3.78)−1.434 a0.1540.155−0.1750.484
Abbreviations: CI, Confidence Interval; GAF, Global Assessment of Functioning; LL, lower limit; NOS, not otherwise specified; PANSS, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale; SUMD, Scale Unawareness of Mental Disorders; UL, upper limit. a Mann–Whitney U test; b Chi-square test; * Level of significance < 0.05.
Table 2. Gender differences in social cognition.
Table 2. Gender differences in social cognition.
Men (n = 129)Women (n = 62)Statistic
(U-MW)		p-ValueCohen’s d95% CIANCOVA
(d.f. = 1)
LLULFp-Valueη2
Mean (SD)Mean (SD)
Faces Test17.46 (2.05)17.75 (1.65)0.6430.520−0.154−0.440.130.0940.7590.001
Hinting Task1.56 (0.42)1.67 (0.33)1.4500.147−0.271−0.560.020.7990.3730.004
IPSAQ
Externalizing Bias0.69 (3.46)0.90 (4.39)0.1270.901−0.056−0.410.300.0670.7960.001
Personalizing Bias0.70 (0.27)0.66 (0.32)−0.4520.6530.131−0.230.490.0150.9020.000
Univariate analysis of variance with age, depression and education level as covariates, and diagnosis as a fixed factor. Abbreviations: CI, Confidence Interval; IPSAQ, Internal, Personal and Situational Attributions Questionnaire; LL, lower limit; UL, upper limit.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Verdaguer-Rodríguez, M.; López-Carrilero, R.; Ferrer-Quintero, M.; García-Mieres, H.; Díaz-Cutraro, L.; Grasa, E.; Pousa, E.; Lorente, E.; Birulés, I.; Peláez, T.; et al. Are There Gender Differences in Social Cognition in First-Episode Psychosis? Women 2021, 1, 204-211. https://doi.org/10.3390/women1040018

AMA Style

Verdaguer-Rodríguez M, López-Carrilero R, Ferrer-Quintero M, García-Mieres H, Díaz-Cutraro L, Grasa E, Pousa E, Lorente E, Birulés I, Peláez T, et al. Are There Gender Differences in Social Cognition in First-Episode Psychosis? Women. 2021; 1(4):204-211. https://doi.org/10.3390/women1040018

Chicago/Turabian Style

Verdaguer-Rodríguez, Marina, Raquel López-Carrilero, Marta Ferrer-Quintero, Helena García-Mieres, Luciana Díaz-Cutraro, Eva Grasa, Esther Pousa, Ester Lorente, Irene Birulés, Trinidad Peláez, and et al. 2021. "Are There Gender Differences in Social Cognition in First-Episode Psychosis?" Women 1, no. 4: 204-211. https://doi.org/10.3390/women1040018

APA Style

Verdaguer-Rodríguez, M., López-Carrilero, R., Ferrer-Quintero, M., García-Mieres, H., Díaz-Cutraro, L., Grasa, E., Pousa, E., Lorente, E., Birulés, I., Peláez, T., Barrigón, M. L., Ruiz-Delgado, I., González-Higueras, F., Cid, J., Gutiérrez-Zotes, A., Cuadras, D., Spanish Metacognition Group, Barajas, A., & Ochoa, S. (2021). Are There Gender Differences in Social Cognition in First-Episode Psychosis? Women, 1(4), 204-211. https://doi.org/10.3390/women1040018

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop