“…However, there was no significant difference in vividness in their AM compared with controls. 3) In patients’ life stories, the emotional valence was less positive compared to controls. |
4) Patients’ AM reasoning (i.e.,,meaning-making) and coherence of stories were significantly poorer. |
5) No difference was observed in scores for culture life scripts. |
47 | Buck et al (2015) [79]US | Outpatients, n = 41 | • IPII* | 1) In patients’ narratives, their anticipatory pleasure was positively correlated with first-person plural pronouns (i.e., we, us, and our), and connection to the past in storytelling. | Socializing with others could make patients feel pleasure. Moreover, authors pointed out that the capacity to experience pleasure was related to one’s past; as seen in a meaningful way by the individual. | 0.955 |
2) Also, patients’ consummatory pleasure was positively correlated with first-person plural pronouns, and connection to the past in storytelling. |
3) No significant relationship was observed between psychosis symptoms with the ability of experiencing pleasure. |
48 | MacDougall et al (2015) [80]Canada | Outpatients, n = 24 | • To recollect 3 events in highly positive, highly negative, and neutral emotions. | 1) Patients’ poorer performance in episodic memory for negative events predicted their lower insight (regarding social consequences) into their illness. | Authors suggested that AM performance predicted patient insight about their mental illness. | 0.909 |
49 | Alle et al (2016) [81]France | Study 1:Outpatients, n = 20Controls, n = 21Samples were matched in age.Study 2:Outpatients, n = 30Controls, n = 28Samples were match in age, level of education, and IQ. | • Life narratives with free recall (Study 1)• Life narratives with structured protocol (Study 2): 7 important events. | 1) Study 1: No difference between controls and patients in length of narratives. | Reduced global temporal coherence may be due to lower levels of executive functioning. Authors also emphasise the method of collecting life stories with a more structured protocol; global temporal coherence among controls and patients was enhanced. | 0.955 |
2) No difference between groups in terms of local indicators (i.e., date, age, life period, and distance from the present). |
3) Study 2: Patients’ executive functioning was significantly lower than controls and their narratives were shorter. |
4) However, patients’ capacities for identifying event order throughout the narratives (i.e., global temporal coherence) were poorer than controls, and there were more temporal distortion in patients’ narratives compared with controls in both studies. |
5) With structured protocol, controls and patients appeared to score higher in global temporal coherence. |
6) No difference was observed in temporal distortion and elaboration of ending in both studies. |
50 | Holm et al (2016) [82]Denmark | |
…”