Cargando…

Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches

In light of increasing interest in metacognition and its role in recovery from psychosis, a range of new treatments focused on addressing metacognitive deficits have emerged. These include Metacognitive Therapy, Metacognitive Training, metacognitive insight and reflection therapy, and metacognitive...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lysaker, Paul H, Gagen, Emily, Moritz, Steffen, Schweitzer, Robert D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6130286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30233262
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S146446
_version_ 1783353912416272384
author Lysaker, Paul H
Gagen, Emily
Moritz, Steffen
Schweitzer, Robert D
author_facet Lysaker, Paul H
Gagen, Emily
Moritz, Steffen
Schweitzer, Robert D
author_sort Lysaker, Paul H
collection PubMed
description In light of increasing interest in metacognition and its role in recovery from psychosis, a range of new treatments focused on addressing metacognitive deficits have emerged. These include Metacognitive Therapy, Metacognitive Training, metacognitive insight and reflection therapy, and metacognitive interpersonal therapy for psychosis. While each of these treatments uses the term metacognitive, each differs in terms of their epistemological underpinnings, their structure, format, presumed mechanisms of action, and primary outcomes. To clarify how these treatments converge and diverge, we first offer a brief history of metacognition as well as its potential role in an individual’s response to and recovery from complicated mental health conditions including psychosis. We then review the background, practices, and supporting evidence for each treatment. Finally, we will offer a framework for thinking about how each of these approaches may ultimately complement rather than contradict one another and highlight areas for development. We suggest first that each is concerned with something beyond what people with psychosis think about themselves and their lives. Each of these four approaches is interested in how patients with severe mental illness think about themselves. Each looks at immediate reactions and ideas that frame the meaning of thoughts. Second, each of these approaches is more concerned with why people make dysfunctional decisions and take maladaptive actions rather than what comprised those decisions and actions. Third, despite their differences, each of these treatments is true to the larger construct of metacognition and is focused on person’s relationships to their mental experiences, promoting various forms of self-understanding which allow for better self-management. Each can be distinguished from other cognitive and skills-based approaches to the treatment of psychosis in their emphasis on sense-making rather than learning a new specific thing to say, think, or do in a given situation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6130286
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61302862018-09-19 Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches Lysaker, Paul H Gagen, Emily Moritz, Steffen Schweitzer, Robert D Psychol Res Behav Manag Review In light of increasing interest in metacognition and its role in recovery from psychosis, a range of new treatments focused on addressing metacognitive deficits have emerged. These include Metacognitive Therapy, Metacognitive Training, metacognitive insight and reflection therapy, and metacognitive interpersonal therapy for psychosis. While each of these treatments uses the term metacognitive, each differs in terms of their epistemological underpinnings, their structure, format, presumed mechanisms of action, and primary outcomes. To clarify how these treatments converge and diverge, we first offer a brief history of metacognition as well as its potential role in an individual’s response to and recovery from complicated mental health conditions including psychosis. We then review the background, practices, and supporting evidence for each treatment. Finally, we will offer a framework for thinking about how each of these approaches may ultimately complement rather than contradict one another and highlight areas for development. We suggest first that each is concerned with something beyond what people with psychosis think about themselves and their lives. Each of these four approaches is interested in how patients with severe mental illness think about themselves. Each looks at immediate reactions and ideas that frame the meaning of thoughts. Second, each of these approaches is more concerned with why people make dysfunctional decisions and take maladaptive actions rather than what comprised those decisions and actions. Third, despite their differences, each of these treatments is true to the larger construct of metacognition and is focused on person’s relationships to their mental experiences, promoting various forms of self-understanding which allow for better self-management. Each can be distinguished from other cognitive and skills-based approaches to the treatment of psychosis in their emphasis on sense-making rather than learning a new specific thing to say, think, or do in a given situation. Dove Medical Press 2018-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6130286/ /pubmed/30233262 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S146446 Text en © 2018 Lysaker et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Lysaker, Paul H
Gagen, Emily
Moritz, Steffen
Schweitzer, Robert D
Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches
title Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches
title_full Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches
title_fullStr Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches
title_full_unstemmed Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches
title_short Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches
title_sort metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6130286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30233262
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S146446
work_keys_str_mv AT lysakerpaulh metacognitiveapproachestothetreatmentofpsychosisacomparisonoffourapproaches
AT gagenemily metacognitiveapproachestothetreatmentofpsychosisacomparisonoffourapproaches
AT moritzsteffen metacognitiveapproachestothetreatmentofpsychosisacomparisonoffourapproaches
AT schweitzerrobertd metacognitiveapproachestothetreatmentofpsychosisacomparisonoffourapproaches