Sharing positive events: Ecological momentary assessment of emotion regulation via social capitalization in schizotypy.

Emotional deficits are prominent in schizophrenia-spectrum psychopathology and linked with poorer outcomes. Schizotypy, an underlying personality organization that putatively confers vulnerability to developing schizophrenia, has been associated with increased negative affect, decreased positive affect, and some difficulty with emotion regulation. This study explored the role of social capitalization, the upregulation of positive emotion when positive life events are shared with others, in schizotypy. Social capitalization is relevant for schizotypy given its association with social functioning and social motivation abnormalities. Using mobile assessment methods, a sample of college students (N=73) completed daily surveys via a mobile application two times per day for seven days and made daily ratings of mood and answered questions regarding any capitalization attempt for a positive event. Results indicated that higher schizotypy and not sharing an event were independently associated with lower happiness and increased sadness and anxiety. When an event was shared, lower schizotypy and supportive/enthusiastic response perception were independently associated with increased happiness. No significant interactions were observed between schizotypy and social capitalization variables. Future research would benefit from exploring the role that other common schizotypy concomitants, e.g., social anxiety or social disconnection, play in social capitalization and the extent this is helped or hindered via mass personal technological mediums.

Predicting self-injurious thoughts in daily life using ambulatory assessment of state cognition.

Self-injurious thoughts (SITs) fluctuate considerably from moment to moment. As such, "static" and temporally stable predictors (e.g., demographic variables, prior history) are suboptimal in predicting imminent SITs. This concern is particularly true for "online" cognitive abilities, which are important for understanding SITs, but are typically measured using tests selected for temporal stability. Advances in ambulatory assessments (i.e., real-time assessment in a naturalistic environment) allow for measuring cognition with improved temporal resolution. The present study measured relationships between "state" cognitive performance, measured using an ambulatory-based Trail Making Test, and SITs. Self-reported state hope and social connectedness was also measured. Data were collected using a specially designed mobile application (administered 4x/week up to 28 days) in substance use inpatients (N = 99). Consistent with prior literature, state hope and social connectedness was significantly associated with state SITs. Importantly, poorer state cognitive performance also significantly predicted state SITs, independent of hallmark static and state self-report risk variables. These findings highlight the potential importance of "online" cognition to predict SITs. Ambulatory recording reflects an efficient, sensitive, and ecological valid methodology for evaluating subjective and objectives predictors of imminent SITs.

Psychiatric Risk Assessment from the Clinician's Perspective: Lessons for the Future.

Accurate prediction of risk-states in Serious Mental Illnesses (SMIs) is critical for reducing their massive societal burden. Risk-state assessments are notably inaccurate. Recent innovations, including widely available and inexpensive mobile technologies for ambulatory "biobehavioral" data, can reshape risk assessment. To help understand and accelerate clinician involvement, we surveyed 90 multi-disciplinary clinicians serving SMI populations in various settings to evaluate how risk assessment is conducted and can improve. Clinicians reported considerable variability in conducting risk assessment, and few clinicians explicated their procedures beyond tying it to broader mental status examinations or interviews. Very few clinicians endorsed using currently-available standardized risk measures, and most reported low confidence in their utility. Clinicians also reported spending approximately half the time conducting individual risk assessments than optimally needed. When asked about improvement, virtually no clinicians acknowledged biobehavioral, objective technologies, or ambulatory recording. Overall, clinicians seemed unaware of meaningful ways to improve risk assessment.