Cargando…

Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life

Social isolation has been suggested to foster paranoia. Here we investigate whether social company (i.e., being alone vs. not) and its nature (i.e., stranger/distant vs. familiar other) affects paranoia differently depending on psychosis risk. Social interactions and paranoid thinking in daily life...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fett, Anne-Kathrin J., Hanssen, Esther, Eemers, Marlie, Peters, Emmanuelle, Shergill, Sukhi S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8803722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34129115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00406-021-01278-4
_version_ 1784642929810210816
author Fett, Anne-Kathrin J.
Hanssen, Esther
Eemers, Marlie
Peters, Emmanuelle
Shergill, Sukhi S.
author_facet Fett, Anne-Kathrin J.
Hanssen, Esther
Eemers, Marlie
Peters, Emmanuelle
Shergill, Sukhi S.
author_sort Fett, Anne-Kathrin J.
collection PubMed
description Social isolation has been suggested to foster paranoia. Here we investigate whether social company (i.e., being alone vs. not) and its nature (i.e., stranger/distant vs. familiar other) affects paranoia differently depending on psychosis risk. Social interactions and paranoid thinking in daily life were investigated in 29 patients with clinically stable non-affective psychotic disorders, 20 first-degree relatives, and 26 controls (n = 75), using the experience sampling method (ESM). ESM was completed up to ten times daily for 1 week. Patients experienced marginally greater paranoia than relatives [b = 0.47, p = 0.08, 95% CI (− 0.06, 1.0)] and significantly greater paranoia than controls [b = 0.55, p = 0.03, 95% CI (0.5, 1.0)], but controls and relatives did not differ [b = 0.07, p = 0.78, 95% CI (− 0.47, 0.61)]. Patients were more often alone [68.5% vs. 44.8% and 56.2%, respectively, p = 0.057] and experienced greater paranoia when alone than when in company [b = 0.11, p = 0.016, 95% CI (0.02, 0.19)]. In relatives this was reversed [b = − 0.17, p < 0.001, 95% CI (− 0.28, − 0.07)] and in controls non-significant [b = − 0.02, p = 0.67, 95% CI (− 0.09, 0.06)]. The time-lagged association between being in social company and subsequent paranoia was non-significant and paranoia did not predict the likelihood of being in social company over time (both p’s = 0.68). All groups experienced greater paranoia in company of strangers/distant others than familiar others [X(2)(2) = 4.56, p = 0.03] and being with familiar others was associated with lower paranoia over time [X(2)(2) = 4.9, p = 0.03]. Patients are frequently alone. Importantly, social company appears to limit their paranoia, particularly when being with familiar people. The findings stress the importance of interventions that foster social engagement and ties with family and friends.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8803722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88037222022-02-02 Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life Fett, Anne-Kathrin J. Hanssen, Esther Eemers, Marlie Peters, Emmanuelle Shergill, Sukhi S. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Original Paper Social isolation has been suggested to foster paranoia. Here we investigate whether social company (i.e., being alone vs. not) and its nature (i.e., stranger/distant vs. familiar other) affects paranoia differently depending on psychosis risk. Social interactions and paranoid thinking in daily life were investigated in 29 patients with clinically stable non-affective psychotic disorders, 20 first-degree relatives, and 26 controls (n = 75), using the experience sampling method (ESM). ESM was completed up to ten times daily for 1 week. Patients experienced marginally greater paranoia than relatives [b = 0.47, p = 0.08, 95% CI (− 0.06, 1.0)] and significantly greater paranoia than controls [b = 0.55, p = 0.03, 95% CI (0.5, 1.0)], but controls and relatives did not differ [b = 0.07, p = 0.78, 95% CI (− 0.47, 0.61)]. Patients were more often alone [68.5% vs. 44.8% and 56.2%, respectively, p = 0.057] and experienced greater paranoia when alone than when in company [b = 0.11, p = 0.016, 95% CI (0.02, 0.19)]. In relatives this was reversed [b = − 0.17, p < 0.001, 95% CI (− 0.28, − 0.07)] and in controls non-significant [b = − 0.02, p = 0.67, 95% CI (− 0.09, 0.06)]. The time-lagged association between being in social company and subsequent paranoia was non-significant and paranoia did not predict the likelihood of being in social company over time (both p’s = 0.68). All groups experienced greater paranoia in company of strangers/distant others than familiar others [X(2)(2) = 4.56, p = 0.03] and being with familiar others was associated with lower paranoia over time [X(2)(2) = 4.9, p = 0.03]. Patients are frequently alone. Importantly, social company appears to limit their paranoia, particularly when being with familiar people. The findings stress the importance of interventions that foster social engagement and ties with family and friends. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-06-15 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8803722/ /pubmed/34129115 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00406-021-01278-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Paper
Fett, Anne-Kathrin J.
Hanssen, Esther
Eemers, Marlie
Peters, Emmanuelle
Shergill, Sukhi S.
Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life
title Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life
title_full Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life
title_fullStr Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life
title_full_unstemmed Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life
title_short Social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life
title_sort social isolation and psychosis: an investigation of social interactions and paranoia in daily life
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8803722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34129115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00406-021-01278-4
work_keys_str_mv AT fettannekathrinj socialisolationandpsychosisaninvestigationofsocialinteractionsandparanoiaindailylife
AT hanssenesther socialisolationandpsychosisaninvestigationofsocialinteractionsandparanoiaindailylife
AT eemersmarlie socialisolationandpsychosisaninvestigationofsocialinteractionsandparanoiaindailylife
AT petersemmanuelle socialisolationandpsychosisaninvestigationofsocialinteractionsandparanoiaindailylife
AT shergillsukhis socialisolationandpsychosisaninvestigationofsocialinteractionsandparanoiaindailylife