Mental Imagery in Early Psychosis

Laura Auvinen-Lintunen,Tuula Ilonen,Maija Lindgren,Tuula Kieseppä,Jaana Suvisaari

doi:10.1177/02762366211021762

Abstract

Dysfunction in mental imagery may contribute to the development of mental disorders. We studied the vividness and controllability of mental imagery in a sample of 42 individuals with recent-onset psychosis, using a cross sectional design. Contrary to earlier studies, the claim that mental imagery is enhanced and the controllability weak in psychotic disorder was not supported. Especially the negative and affective symptoms associated with low vividness, and the stronger the symptoms the patients had, the less vivid was their imagery. Anxiety and self-neglect were the best predictors of low vividness. Only an elevated mood associated with higher vividness. The cognitive performance of the participants did not associate significantly with imagery. Surprisingly, organic modality was reported to be the most vivid modality, whereas visual imagery was the least vivid. Understanding the role of mental imagery in early psychosis may help us to understand and treat these disorders better.

Highlights

Dysfunction in mental imagery may contribute to the development of mental disorders
Our findings do not support the claim (Bo€cker et al, 2000; Mintz & Alpert, 1972; Oertel et al, 2009; Sack et al, 2005) that mental imagery vividness is enhanced in people with psychotic disorder, nor that controllability is weak
Vivid imagery has been found to associate with hallucinations. In this recent-onset psychosis sample, we found relationships between mental imagery and clinical symptoms that were contrary to some previous studies (Oertel et al, 2009; Sack et al, 2005)

Summary

Introduction

Dysfunction in mental imagery may contribute to the development of mental disorders. We studied the vividness and controllability of mental imagery in a sample of 42 individuals with recent-onset psychosis, using a cross sectional design. The controllability refers to the ability to intentionally transform or manipulate mental images in one’s mind (Gordon, 1949; Kosslyn, 1994; Richardson, 1994) This means that persons have a capacity to shift their mental view of an object and they can view it from different positions. Mental imagery ability can differ in its vividness and controllability according to personality types and mental disorders (Ji et al., Auvinen-Lintunen et al.2019; Richardson, 1994). This is contrary to the previous claim by Harvey et al (2004), conceptualizing mental imagery as a continuum, where at one end is normative processing and at the other end psychopathological processing

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion