search

psych-214-fall-2016 / project-blue

Psych 214 | Fall 2016 | project-blue
Other
2 stars 6 forks source link

Evaluate questionaire data for correlation with BOLD #45

Closed mlnewton closed 7 years ago

mlnewton commented 7 years ago

Looking into this now

mlnewton commented 7 years ago

from Openfmri 'participants.json', description of the tests. These 3 seem to be the main measures. Still can't find the actual scores for each subject, though...

"LSHS_14, "Launay-Slade Hallucination Scale" "Description": "Proneness to hallucinations in healthy participants"

"DELUproneness, "Proneness to delusions",
    "Description": "Proneness to delusions was assessed by means of the Peters Delusion Inventory scale"

"VisualScore": "Visual imagery score", "Description": "The subjects were asked to self-rate the truth of the following statements using a 0-3 scale, 0 being the least true: 'I can easily identify animals or things in the clouds', 'When I see spots (of painting, humidity...), I can see faces, silhouettes or objects in them.' The sum of these two scores constitutes the VisualScore", "Units": "0-6, 0 being lowest proneness to visual imagery"

joewiner commented 7 years ago

Scores are in the participants.tsv file

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:52 AM, mlnewton notifications@github.com wrote:

from Openfmri 'participants.json', description of the tests. These 3 seem to be the main measures. Still can't find the actual scores for each subject, though...

"LSHS_14, "Launay-Slade Hallucination Scale" "Description": "Proneness to hallucinations in healthy participants"

"DELUproneness, "Proneness to delusions", "Description": "Proneness to delusions was assessed by means of the Peters Delusion Inventory scale"

"VisualScore": "Visual imagery score", "Description": "The subjects were asked to self-rate the truth of the following statements using a 0-3 scale, 0 being the least true: 'I can easily identify animals or things in the clouds', 'When I see spots (of painting, humidity...), I can see faces, silhouettes or objects in them.' The sum of these two scores constitutes the VisualScore", "Units": "0-6, 0 being lowest proneness to visual imagery"

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/psych-214-fall-2016/project-blue/issues/45#issuecomment-266843149, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFfeFPk_w-ACCppWesi2OzKwyo_-r5Cxks5rHveIgaJpZM4LMDTp .

mlnewton commented 7 years ago

Just got it, thanks. Had to re-download the file since it must have accidentally gotten deleted or moved

mlnewton commented 7 years ago

So they really only used divisions and variants of 2 accepted evaluations: the Launay-Slade Hallucination Scale (LSHS) and the Peters Delusion Inventory (PDI) scale.

Here's an interesting discussion about how the LSHS does not necessarily capture the same experiences in non-clinical and clinical populations despite answering the same way to the survey questions: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3363387/ An excerpt: 'On RHS item 1 (“My thoughts seem as real as actual events in my life”), the non-clinical sample described experiences classifiable as magical thinking (e.g., “Sometimes I imagine situations that I want to happen to me and they happen”), whereas the clinical sample described experiences reflecting dereistic thinking (e.g., “I believe that my brother was dead when he was really alive”)'

And here's what appears to be a photocopied version of a chapter on the PDI that also reviews other testing scales: http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/4/1005.long

joewiner commented 7 years ago

So if you look at what's written on LSHS and PDI, and also look at the range of scores in this group of subjects, do you think one would be better to look at than the other? It seems like LSHS has a pretty good range. We could try exploring both, as well as the subscores they list in the .tsv file

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 1:58 PM, mlnewton notifications@github.com wrote:

So they really only used divisions and variants of 2 accepted evaluations: the Launay-Slade Hallucination Scale (LSHS) and the Peters Delusion Inventory (PDI) scale.

Here's an interesting discussion about how the LSHS does not necessarily capture the same experiences in non-clinical and clinical populations despite answering the same way to the survey questions: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3363387/ An excerpt: 'On RHS item 1 (“My thoughts seem as real as actual events in my life”), the non-clinical sample described experiences classifiable as magical thinking (e.g., “Sometimes I imagine situations that I want to happen to me and they happen”), whereas the clinical sample described experiences reflecting dereistic thinking (e.g., “I believe that my brother was dead when he was really alive”)'

And here's what appears to be a photocopied version of a chapter on the PDI that also reviews other testing scales: http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/4/1005.long

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/psych-214-fall-2016/project-blue/issues/45#issuecomment-266875018, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFfeFOSZb-b0Ann5zgax-gPHcDbgG-qcks5rHxT_gaJpZM4LMDTp .

mlnewton commented 7 years ago

I think we should look at both the LSHS global scores ('LSHS_14') and the PDI scores ('DELUproneness'), but the LSHS scores are more relevant to sensory encoding/retrieval while the PDI is more internal, thought-driven. Both would be interesting to consider for correlation with incorrectly recalling a visual stimulus.

mlnewton commented 7 years ago

I don't think we should use any of the other measurements because they are not validated elsewhere and do not have enough power to make any conclusions with so few total questions.

jdtheiss commented 7 years ago

Thanks for looking into the different scales, Melissa. I agree we should just use the LSHS and PDI scores. This will be implemented in the wrapper.

joewiner commented 7 years ago

@mlnewton do you feel comfortable closing this issue? Seems like you've done a thorough evaluation!

mlnewton commented 7 years ago

Yep, sounds good to close

On Dec 16, 2016 5:53 PM, "joewiner" notifications@github.com wrote:

@mlnewton https://github.com/mlnewton do you feel comfortable closing this issue? Seems like you've done a thorough evaluation!

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/psych-214-fall-2016/project-blue/issues/45#issuecomment-267715751, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADndj-TDJSRrEiwefdfvg5bXOqBMquweks5rIxZrgaJpZM4LMDTp .