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

TY - JOUR

T1 - Metacognitive approaches to the treatment of psychosis: a comparison of four approaches

AU - Lysaker, Paul H

AU - Gagen, Emily

AU - Moritz, Steffen

AU - Schweitzer, Robert D

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Journal Article

KW - Review

U2 - 10.2147/PRBM.S146446

DO - 10.2147/PRBM.S146446

M3 - SCORING: Review article

C2 - 30233262

VL - 11

SP - 341

EP - 351

JO - PSYCHOL RES BEHAV MA

JF - PSYCHOL RES BEHAV MA

SN - 1179-1578

ER -