This research tested hypotheses concerning attachment, social support, and grief responses to the loss of animal companionship. Participants whose companion cat or dog had recently died (N = 429) completed the Attachment Style Questionnaire, the Inventory of Complicated Grief, and the Multidimensional Health Profile-Psychosocial Functioning questionnaires. Both attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance were found to be positively associated with respondents' grief, depression, anxiety, and somatic symptoms. Social support was found to be negatively associated with these outcomes as well as with attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance. In multiple regression analyses, attachment anxiety incrementally predicted grief, anxiety and somatic symptoms, attachment avoidance incrementally predicted grief and depression, and social support incrementally predicted all outcomes. Interaction effects of attachment and social support in relation to outcomes were not found. The present study's implications and limitations are discussed, as are directions for future research.

The present study, utilizing a sample of inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (n = 167), examined the factor structure of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS). Principal axis exploratory factor analysis, multiple factor extraction criteria, and higher-order factor analysis were used. Results were inconsistent with the five-factor structure of the RBANS purported in the test manual. Factor extraction criteria recommended extraction of one or two factors. Extraction of two factors resulted in a memory dimension and a less homogeneous visual perception and processing speed dimension. Higher-order analysis found that a second-order factor, representing general neurocognitive functioning, accounted for over three times the total and common variance than the two first-order factors combined. It was concluded that although the RBANS appears to be a useful measure of general neurocognitive functioning for inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, clinical interpretation beyond a general factor (i.e., Total Scale score) should be done with caution in this population. Limitations of the present study and directions for future research are discussed.

Patients who are committed to a psychiatric inpatient hospital are at increased risk for neuropsychological compromise. This study investigated a large (n = 260) and diverse sample of patients at a forensic state psychiatric hospital. A substantial proportion (35.8%) of the sample performed two standard deviations below the normative mean on the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS). In addition, 65% of the participants reported a history of developmental delays, less than 12 years of education, or past learning difficulties. Participants who reported these developmental and academic problems performed worse on the RBANS compared with those without such a history. Additionally, the more developmental/educational risk factors a participant reported, the more likely they were to be impaired on the RBANS. Half of the sample reported a history of at least one neurological risk factor (e.g., history of head injury with loss of consciousness). However, in this sample, a history of neurological risk factors did not influence overall performance on the RBANS and did not increase the likelihood of impairment. These results speak to the relevance of neuropsychological services at state psychiatric hospitals and provide some evidence that a history of developmental or academic problems may help identify psychiatric patients with neuropsychological compromise.

Objective To examine whether Test of Premorbid Functioning (TOPF) and Wide Range Achievement Test—Word Reading subtest (WRAT WR) are interchangeable measures, and the relationship between these measures and intelligence, among patients with schizophrenia. Method In this archival study, the authors examined neuropsychology referrals of an inpatient forensic state hospital. Patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD) who received the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition or the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence—Second Edition and either TOPF or WRAT WR were considered for inclusion. The final sample consisted of 119 individuals (73.1% male). Results Although there was a linear relationship between most TOPF variables and WRAT WR, their concordance was weak (concordance correlation coefficients [CCC] < 0.90). Poor concordance was also observed between current FSIQ and all standard scores (SS) derived from word reading measures. FSIQ-word reading measure discrepancy scores differed significantly from a hypothesized mean of 0 (mean discrepancy range = −7.42 to −16.60). Discrepancies greater than one standard deviation (>1 SD) were highest among demographics-based SS (i.e. TOPF Predicted and Simple without TOPF). Performance-based SS, particularly TOPF Actual and WRAT4 WR, had the fewest discrepancy scores >1 SD fromFSIQ. Conclusions TOPF and WRAT WR should not be used interchangeably among institutionalized patients with SSDs. TOPF and WRAT WR were discrepant from FSIQ, with demographic variables producing higher SS relative to performance-based variables. Future research is needed to determine which of these measures more accurately estimates intelligence among inpatients withSSDs.

No abstract