Introducing further developments towards an ICS formulation of psychosis: a comment on Gumley et al. (1999) An interacting cognitive subsystems model of relapse and the course of psychosis

Clarke, Isabel

doi:10.1002/cpp.290

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As we have seen, such phenomena also form the basis of Clarke's (2001;2002) argument for two different types of experience: one framed within the contextual (propositional) boundaries of space, time, etc., and one that involves participation in the unbounded whole. This paper agrees that these phenomena involve a departure from one's usual context and boundaries, and argues that this is best described within a multi-level framework, where the conceptual system becomes dissociated from, or weakened in its association to, the perceptual system.…”

Section: Subjective Phenomenamentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The only known authors to have explicitly applied a multi-level framework in the psychosis literature are Gumley, White & Power (1999), Clarke (2001;2002), Barnard (2003) and Jones (2001). The first three apply ICS to psychosis, and the fourth applies SPAARS to bipolar disorder.…”

Section: Previous Multi-level Applications To Psychosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…She proposes that schemata activation, accompanied by increased arousal, will cause a breakdown of communication between the propositional and implicational levels, leading to a dominance of the implicational subsystem. Clarke (2002) not only believes that this can explain the qualitative discontinuity between psychotic and everyday experience, but also that it can account for the wider realm of spiritual / mystical experience. Clarke suggests that "the everyday, scientific state is one where the propositional and implicational subsystems are working nicely together in balance, whereas the spiritual/psychotic state is one where the two are disjoint, and the system is essentially driven by the implicational subsystem" (Clarke, 2001, p136).…”

Section: Previous Multi-level Applications To Psychosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because the perceptual system processes information automatically, its filtering mechanism will not prevent material from entering awareness on the basis of reason and intentionality alone; or indeed, because that happens to be the instruction of a psychological experiment. By considering psychotic symptoms as sources of current threat, either Clarke's (2002) threat to self, or the threat inherent to command hallucinations, persecutory delusions etc., it is understandable how the survival-lead perceptual system might dominate at the expense of the conceptual system, allowing more sensory percepts into awareness.…”

Section: Cognitive Phenomenamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There has been much interest in the incidence of psychotic-like experiences in the non-clinical population (Poulton, Caspi & Moffit, 2000;van Os, Hansen, Bijl & Ravelli, 2000;Verdoux et al, 1998), and the multi-level framework may be in a unique position to explain their similarities and differences with those of the clinical population. Clarke's (2002) theoretical ideas on the spiritual-psychotic experiential realm have already been noted, and there is now growing research interest in the interface between psychotic and spiritual/religious phenomena (Jackson & Fulford, 1997;Day & Peters, 1999;Lovatt, Mason, Brett & Peters, 2010;Brett et al, 2007;Heriot-Maitland, Knight & Peters, in press). Jackson & Fulford (1997) reported that psychotic-like experiences are triggered in both psychotic and spiritual groups by intense stress in the context of existential crises, and that the subsequent distinction between groups depends on "the way in which psychotic phenomena are embedded in the values and beliefs of the person concerned" (p 41).…”

Section: Implications For Clinical and Non-clinical Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Multi-Level Models of Information Processing, and Their Application to Psychosis

Heriot‐Maitland

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multi-level models have been developed to illustrate the mind's processing of qualitatively different types of information, and therefore provide a useful tool for exploring the actions and interactions of different processing levels within a single theoretical framework. This paper firstly reviews a selection of multilevel models, and then constructs a detailed rationale for applying a multi-level framework to psychosis. The argument draws on a wide psychosis literature, in the areas of positive symptoms, subjective phenomena, risk factors, and cognitive phenomena. In doing so, the discussion highlights some limitations of current (single-level) cognitive models of psychosis, and argues that a multi-level framework not only offers enhanced explanatory power, but also facilitates an integration of the evidence accumulated in different areas of psychosis research. Implications of a multi-level approach are discussed with regards to understanding the ‘psychotic-like’ experiences of both clinical and non-clinical populations. In particular, the roles of emotional meaning and function of psychotic phenomena are emphasised, and the clinical therapeutic tenet of normalisation is encouraged.

show abstract

Section: Subjective Phenomenamentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Previous Multi-level Applications To Psychosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Multi-level Applications To Psychosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cognitive Phenomenamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Implications For Clinical and Non-clinical Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Multi-Level Models of Information Processing, and Their Application to Psychosis

Heriot‐Maitland

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

References

2002

The Case Study Guide to Cognitive Behaviour Therapy of Psychosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implicational meaning versus meaning implied by experience: a reply to Clarke (2002) introducing further developments towards an ICS formulation of psychosis

Gumley

2002

Clin Psychology and Psychoth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OVERVIEWI am grateful to Clarke (2002) for her comments regarding Gumley, application of the Interacting Cognitive Subsystems (ICS; Teasdale & Barnard, 1993) model to understanding the process of the development and evolution of relapse in psychosis. Gumley et al. made three proposals in this paper. First, that there was a need for a multi-level conceptualization to account for the development of relapse. Second, that the early stages of relapse sees the activation of higher-level meanings which accelerate the evolution of relapse and that persistent reactivation of these meanings results in the maintenance of psychosis. Third, that the ICS model provided an architecture to conceptualize such an approach to understanding relapse and the course of psychosis. IMPLICATIONAL MEANINGTo recap briefly, in ICS information processing relies on the recognition of recurring patterns of information which are derived from multiple sources. These recurring patterns are embodied in the creation of propositional representations reflecting, on the one hand, intended and, on the other hand, current states of affairs. The creation of * Correspondence to: Dr A. I. Gumley, Department of Psychological Medicine, University of Glasgow, Gartnavel Royal Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland G12 0XH. generic and holistic implicational models, which reflect the discrepancies between intended and current states, can then effectively monitor progress towards goal attainment. Implicational meaning is composed of constituents derived from the external world (for example, auditory and visual information) and the internal world (body state information, and propositional meanings such as thoughts or images). In this sense, implicational meaning is a high level or meaning, which abstracts over sensory, body-state, and semantic sources of information. Therefore according to our analysis (Gumley et al., 1999) during relapse the experience of a pattern or configuration of internal and/or external events which have a strong similarity with previous relapses will access implicational meaning more rapidly than if the configuration has a lower similarity. The activation of implicational meaning structures derived from previous experiences of psychosis then will initiate and accelerate the process of relapse. A primary source of information for a relapse configuration is internal information on body-state and arousal and cognitive-perceptual change.Clarke has highlighted the role played by increased arousal in disrupting the reliable appraisal of stimuli, which according to the ICS model, is processed via the propositional subsystem. Propositional meaning is a verballybased subsystem enabling the ongoing appraisal and evaluation of recurring internal and external experiences. Clarke proposes that disruption of propositional processing through increased states

show abstract

Introducing further developments towards an ICS formulation of psychosis: a comment on Gumley et al. (1999) An interacting cognitive subsystems model of relapse and the course of psychosis

Cited by 5 publications

References 12 publications

Multi-Level Models of Information Processing, and Their Application to Psychosis

Multi-Level Models of Information Processing, and Their Application to Psychosis

References

Implicational meaning versus meaning implied by experience: a reply to Clarke (2002) introducing further developments towards an ICS formulation of psychosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About