Development of Voluntary Control Over Voice-Hearing Experiences: Evidence From Treatment-Seeking and Non-Treatment-Seeking Voice-Hearers.
Development of Voluntary Control Over Voice-Hearing Experiences: Evidence From Treatment-Seeking and Non-Treatment-Seeking Voice-Hearers.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/schizbullopen/sgaa052
复制
发表时间：
2020-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Powers AR 3rd
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mourgues C;Negreira AM;Quagan B;Mercan NE;Niles H;Kafadar E;Bien C;Kamal F;Powers AR 3rd
对声音听觉体验的自愿控制是声音接受者中最一致的功能预测指标之一。然而，对语音听力体验的控制可能比通过粗略的临床医生评级的测量方法所理解的更细微和多变，这些测量方法提供的关于控制是如何概念化和发展的信息很少。我们的目标是确定在寻求治疗(N=7)和非寻求治疗(N=8)的听音者中，对语音听力体验的控制演变的关键因素。寻求治疗的听音者来自康涅狄格州听力之声网络的当地分会，而不寻求治疗的听音者则从当地以灵性为导向的组织招募。两组都参与了一项临床评估，并进行了一次半结构化访谈，旨在探索所展示的控制类型以及它是如何被培养的。使用扎根理论，我们发现两组参与者都对他们的语音听力体验施加了直接和间接的控制。那些建立了精神解释框架的参与者比那些建立了病理性框架的参与者更有可能对语音听觉体验施加直接控制。重要的是，尽管他们的经历在解释框架和痛苦方面存在明显差异，但两组人都经历了相似的轨迹，以发展对他们的语音听力体验的控制和接受。了解这些因素对于将对语音听觉体验的控制从现象学观察转变为临床干预的可行途径至关重要。
Voluntary control over voice-hearing experiences is one of the most consistent predictors of functioning among voice-hearers. However, control over voice-hearing experiences is likely to be more nuanced and variable than may be appreciated through coarse clinician-rated measures, which provide little information about how control is conceptualized and developed. We aimed to identify key factors in the evolution of control over voice-hearing experiences in treatment-seeking (N = 7) and non-treatment-seeking (N = 8) voice-hearers. Treatment-seeking voice-hearers were drawn from local chapters of the Connecticut Hearing Voices Network, and non-treatment-seeking voice-hearers were recruited from local spiritually oriented organizations. Both groups participated in a clinical assessment, and a semi-structured interview meant to explore the types of control exhibited and how it is fostered. Using Grounded Theory, we identified that participants from both groups exerted direct and indirect control over their voice-hearing experiences. Participants that developed a spiritual explanatory framework were more likely to exert direct control over the voice-hearing experiences than those that developed a pathologizing framework. Importantly, despite clear differences in explanatory framework and distress because of their experiences, both groups underwent similar trajectories to develop control and acceptance over their voice-hearing experiences. Understanding these factors will be critical in transforming control over voice-hearing experiences from a phenomenological observation to an actionable route for clinical intervention.