Detailed contribution information
| Contribution title | 3454 - Language in schizophrenia in adolescent girls. |
|---|---|
| Contribution code | PS02-37 (P) |
| Authors | |
| Form of presentation | Poster |
| Topic |
|
| Abstract |
Introduction. In psychiatry, language features of patients usually considered especially in the domain of positive disorders (hallucinatory-delusional symptoms) and negative disorders (speech fragmentation, incoherence of speech) (Savitskaya, 1975), also in psychopathological lexis and semantics (Nicodemus et al., 2014; Mikirtumov, 2004). In addition, they were associated with impaired thinking. Research of speech features in adults with schizophrenia are presented in Russian (Golenkov, 2008) and international (Delisi, 2001) clinical studies. Works concerning adolescence are presented much less. There is evidence of lagging or getting closer to the norm of the parameters of cognitive functioning in adolescents with schizophrenia, depending on the severity of the disease (Zvereva, Khromov, 2014). In present work, authors attempt to assess the originality of thinking and language activity in adolescents with endogenous pathology. This part of our work considers female clinical group. Materials & methods. Sample included clinical group of girls (N=15, average age – 15.2, DS: F20.xx, F21.xx) and normative group of girls (N=23, average age – 14). Clinical psychological tasks were used. “Syllabic task” have some similarities to verbal fluency task and aims to identify dynamic and associative features of mental activity (Sumiyoshi et al., 2014). “Construction of objects” task reveals analytical and synthetic features of mental activity. In assessing the results of both tasks we used parameter of coefficient of standard (CS, average value of proximity to normative answers) and some other. Authors were aimed to test the diagnostic potential of these two techniques. Results. CS in “Syllabic task” was 0.57 for clinical sample and 0.68 for normative sample. In “Construction of objects” task results were 0.56 and 0.72 respectively. Also we have results of average latency (in seconds) in “Syllabic task” – 7.50 (normative sample), 2,94 (clinical sample). Results discussion. We have considerable difference between two groups in the CS parameter in favor of normative sample, which may indicate the possibility of these techniques to differentiate the clinical features of language activity at adolescents. |