Does explaining psychogenic nonepileptic seizures using either a biomedical or biopsychosocial framework affect young people's illness representations? An experimental vignette study.

Lay representations of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) are important both for understanding public stigma and anticipating patient responses to PNES diagnosis. The current study presents the first evidence of the general public's representations of PNES and the malleability of these understandings to different ways of explaining PNES. An online experimental study exposed participants (n = 193, aged 18-25 years) to a vignette describing a case of PNES in biomedical terms, PNES in biopsychosocial terms, or epilepsy. Subsequent questionnaires assessed participants' illness representations, causal attributions, and stigmatising attitudes regarding the case about which they read. Results suggest that compared with biomedical framings, biopsychosocial explanations increased perceptions of PNES as threatening. While epilepsy was attributed to significantly more biological and less social causes than either of the PNES vignettes, causal attributions did not differ between biomedically- vs. biopsychosocially-framed PNES. Neither were there any differences between the three conditions in stigmatising attitudes towards people who experience seizures. These findings are useful for clinicians delivering a PNES diagnosis and patients disclosing a PNES diagnosis, in helping anticipate responses to these communications. Further research is required to confirm the clinical and societal significance of the study's first insights into the dynamics of lay responses to PNES.

Inhibitory-control event-related potentials correlate with individual differences in alcohol use.

Impulsivity is a multidimensional construct that is related to different aspects of alcohol use, abuse, and dependence. Inhibitory control, one facet of impulsivity, can be assayed using the stop-signal task (SST) and quantified behaviorally via the stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) and electrophysiologically using event-related potentials (ERPs). Research on the relationship between alcohol use and SSRTs, and between alcohol use and inhibitory-control ERPs, is mixed. Here, adult alcohol users (n = 79), with a wide range of scores on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), completed the SST under electroencephalography (EEG) (70% of participants had AUDIT total scores greater than or equal to 8). Other measures, including demographic, self-report, and task-based measures of impulsivity, personality, and psychological factors, were also recorded. A machine-learning method with penalized linear regression was used to correlate individual differences in alcohol use with impulsivity measures. Four separate models were tested, with out-of-sample validation used to quantify performance. ERPs alone statistically predicted alcohol use (cross-validated r = 0.28), with both early and late ERP components contributing to the model (larger N2, but smaller P3, amplitude). Behavioral data from a wide range of impulsivity measures were also associated with alcohol use (r = 0.37). SSRT was a relatively weak statistical predictor, whereas the Stroop interference effect was relatively strong. The addition of nonimpulsivity behavioral measures did not improve the correlation (r = 0.34) and was similar when ERPs were combined with non-ERP data (r = 0.29). These findings show that inhibitory control ERPs are robustly correlated individual differences in alcohol use.