How to study psychological mechanisms of mania? A systematic review on the methodology of experimental studies on manic mood dysregulation of leading theories on bipolar disorder

Author:

Glas V. F. J.12ORCID,Koenders M. A.3ORCID,Kupka R. W.12ORCID,Regeer E. J.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Altrecht Institute for Mental Health Care Utrecht The Netherlands

2. Department of Psychiatry and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam The Netherlands

3. Clinical Psychology Unit Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionAlthough there are several psychological theories on bipolar disorders (BD), the empirical evidence on these theories through experimental studies is still limited. The current study systematically reviews experimental methods used in studies on the main theories of BD: Reward Hypersensitivity Theory (RST) or Behavioral Activation System (BAS), Integrative Cognitive Model (ICM), Positive Emotion Persistence (PEP), Manic Defense theory (MD), and Mental Imagery (MI). The primary aim is to provide an overview of the used methods and to identify limitations and suggest areas of improvement.MethodsA systematic search of six databases until October 2023 was conducted. Study selection involved two independent reviewers extracting data on experimental study design and methodology.ResultsA total of 84 experimental studies were reviewed. BAS and RST were the most frequently studied theories. The majority of these experimental studies focus on mechanisms of reward sensitivity. Other important elements of the reviewed theories, such as goal setting and—attainment, situation selection (avoidance or approach), activation, affective/emotional reactivity, and regulatory strategies, are understudied. Self‐report and neuropsychological tasks are most often used, while mood induction and physiological measures are rarely used.ConclusionThere is a need for more consensus on the operationalization of psychological theories of mania. Standardization of test batteries could improve comparability among studies and foster a more systematic approach to experimental research. Research on affective (activated) states is still underrepresented in comparison with studies on trait vulnerabilities.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3