Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T12:16:59.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Filtering’ and the Cognitive Deficit in Schizophrenia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2018

D. R. Hemsley  and
S. L. Zawada
D. R. Hemsley
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF
S. L. Zawada
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This study attempted to clarify the nature of dysfunction in the selective attention of schizophrenics. Within the framework of Broadbent's (1971) theory of information processing it was argued that ‘filtering’ inefficiency should be reflected in a reduction in the discrepancy in performance on a short-term memory task between the condition of pre-instruction as to the relevant material and that of post-instruction. Three groups of subjects, 10 schizophrenics, 10 depressives, and 10 normals, matched for age and intelligence were tested on such a task. While the overall performance of normal subjects was superior to that of both psychiatric groups, depressives and schizophrenics did not differ. The normal group also showed a significantly greater improvement with pre-instruction than the psychiatric groups; again, the schizophrenics and depressives did not differ significantly, though there was a tendency for schizophrenics to benefit less than depressives from pre-instruction. It appears that ‘filtering’ difficulties as here defined may not be specific to schizophrenia. Alternative conceptualizations of the cognitive abnormalities shown by schizophrenics, such as slowness of information processing and difficulties in response selection, may be more useful.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 128 , Issue 5 , May 1976 , pp. 456 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1976 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Broadbent, D. E. (1970) Stimulus set and response set: two kinds of selective attention. In Attention: Contemporary Theories and Analysis (ed. Mostofsky, D.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Broadbent, D. E. (1971) Decision and Stress. London and New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Broen, W. E. (1968) Schizophrenia: Research and Theory. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Broen, W. E. & Nakamura, C. Y. (1972) Reduced range of sensitivity in chronic non-paranoid schizophrenics. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 79, No. 1, 106–11.Google Scholar
Cash, T. F., Neale, T. M. & Cromwell, R. L. (1972) Span of apprehension in acute schizophrenics: full report technique. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 79, No. 3, 322–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, J. & McGhih, A. (1962) A comparative study of disordered attention in schizophrenia. Journal of Mental Science, 108, 487–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finn, T. D. (1974) A General Model for Multivariate Analysis. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S. C. (1972) Advantages and problems in the use of performance tests to study schizophrenic deficit. Psychopharmacologia, 24, 1–5.Google Scholar
Hawks, D. V. (1964) The clinical usefulness of some tests of overinclusive thinking in psychiatric patients. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 3, 186–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawks, D. V. & Marshall, W. L. (1971) A parsimonious theory of over-inclusive thinking and retardation in schizophrenia. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawks, D. V. & Robinson, K. N. (1971) Information processing in schizophrenia: the effect of varying the rate of presentation and introducing interference. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10, 30–41.Google Scholar
Heim, A. W. (1955) Manual for the Group Test of General Intelligence AH 4. National Foundation for Educational Research (revised 1967).Google Scholar
Hemsley, D. R. (1975) A two-stage model of attention in schizophrenia research. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, 81–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hemsley, D. R. & Hawks, D. V. (1974) Speed of response and associative errors in schizophrenia. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 293–303.Google Scholar
Kolb, L. C. (1968) Neyes' Modern Clinical Psychiatry. Seventh edition. Philadelphia/London/Toronto: W. B. Saunders Co.Google Scholar
Kulpe, O. (1904) Bericht über den 1st. Kongress für experimentelle Psychologie, pp. 56–8.Google Scholar
Marshall, W. L. (1973) Cognitive functioning in schizophrenia. I. Stimulus analysing and response selection processes. British Journal of Psychiatry, 123, 413–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGhie, A. & Chapman, J. (1961) Disorders of perception and attention in early schizophrenia. British Jounal of Medical Psychology, 34, 103–16.Google ScholarPubMed
Moray, N. (1959) Attention in dichotic listening: affective cues and the influence of instructions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 56–60.Google Scholar
Payne, R. W., Hochberg, A. C. & Hawks, D. V. (1970) Dichotic stimulation as a method of assessing disorder of attention in overinclusive schizophrenic patients. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 76, 258–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Treisman, A. M. (1960) Contextual cues in selective listening. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 242–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venables, P. H. (1964) Input dysfunction in schizophrenia. In Progress in Experimental Personality Research, Vol. 1 (Maher, ed. B.), pp. 1–47. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wishner, J. & Wahl, O. (1974) Dichotic listening in schizophrenia. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, No. 4, 538–46.Google Scholar
Yates, A. J. (1966) Data processing levels and thought disorder in schizophrenia. Australian Journal of Psychology, 18, 103–17.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.