Variations in the Appearance and Interpretation of Interpersonal Eye Contact in Social Categorizations and Psychiatric Populations Worldwide: A Scoping Review with a Critical Appraisal of the Literature

Background: Eye contact is one of the most fundamental forms of interhuman communication. However, to date, there has been no comprehensive research comparing how eye contact is made and interpreted in all possible populations worldwide. This study presents a summary of the existing literature on these modalities stratified to social categorizations and psychiatric disorders. Method: A scoping review with critical appraisal of the literature according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Databases AnthroSource, Medline, CINAHL, the Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection (EBSCO) and PsychInfo were searched. Results: 7068 articles were screened for both the grey literature and reference lists, of which 385 were included, 282 for social categorizations and 103 for psychiatric disorders. In total, 603 thematic clustered outcomes of variations were included. Methodological quality was generally moderate to good. Conclusions: There is a great degree of variation in the presentation and interpretation of eye contact between and within populations. It remains unclear why specific variations occur in populations. Additionally, no gold standard for how eye contact should be used or interpreted emerged from the studies. Further research into the reason for differences in eye contact between and within populations is recommended

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy versus treatment as usual in adults with ADHD: A trial-based economic evaluation

Item does not contain fulltex

Sensory processing and aggressive behavior in adults with autism spectrum disorder

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may be accompanied by aggressive behavior and is associated with sensory processing di

Recovery of adults with autism spectrum disorder during intensive inpatient treatment: a qualitative study

IntroductionAlthough some adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) require intensive and specialized ASD treatment, there is little research on how these adults experience the recovery process. Recovery is defined as the significant improvement in general functioning compared to the situation prior to treatment.MethodsThis qualitative study describes the recovery process from the perspective of adults on the autism spectrum during intensive inpatient treatment. Semi-structured interviews (n = 15) were carried out and analyzed according to the principles of grounded theory.ResultsOur results indicate that, given the specific characteristics of autism, therapeutic interventions and goal-oriented work cannot be carried out successfully, and the recovery process cannot begin, if no good working relationship has been established, and if care is not organized in ways that a person on the autism spectrum finds clear and predictable

Using the Autism-Spectrum Quotient to Discriminate Autism Spectrum Disorder from ADHD in Adult Patients With and Without Comorbid Substance Use Disorder

It is unknown whether the Autism-spectrum quotient (AQ) can discriminate between Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) with or without comorbid Substance Use Disorder (SUD). ANOVA’s were used to analyse the mean AQ (sub)scores of 129 adults with ASD or ADHD. We applied receiver operating characteristic (ROC) computations to assess discriminant power. All but one of the mean AQ (sub)scores were significantly higher for adults with ASD compared to those with ADHD. The SUD status in general was not significantly associated with AQ (sub)scores. On the Social Skills subscale patients with ASD and comorbid SUD showed less impairment than those without SUD. The cut-off score 26 yielded 73% correct classifications. The clinical use of the AQ in differentiating between ASD and ADHD is limited

Grievance-fueled violence can be better understood using an enactive approach

Understanding lone actor grievance-fueled violence remains a challenge. We believe that the concept of grievance provides an opportunity to add an engaged, first-person perspective to the assessment of lone actor extreme violence. We propose an enactivist philosophical approach that can help to understand the why and how of the pathway from grievance to violent extremism. Enactivism sees grievance as a dynamic, interpersonal, and context-sensitive construct that indicates how (potential) offenders make sense of the world they live in and how under certain circumstances it fuels violent behavior. Hence, grievance should not be understood as a given thing, but as an unfolding experience that involves sense-making through (regulation of one’s) interaction with the (social) environment. This (self-)relational and ecological understanding requires another approach than looking at demographic factors or life histories, only from an outsider’s perspective. Enactivism invites us to look at such risk factors as external indices of an ongoing process of active self-regulation and sense-making, and in some cases spiraling toward extreme violence. To understand the mindset of the offender we need to look more in depth at the processes that shape this mindset: why does this person, with this history, in this context, and at this point in time, proceed to use violence? The enactivist approach to the mind offers a complementary framework that may help us to understand the dynamics of grievance as a possible precursor to violent extremism. It also helps to appreciate why the relative unpredictability of the pathway toward lone actor extreme violence is not necessarily a sign of empirical weakness but a matter of principle due to the non-linearity of the processes involved. We end by summarizing how enactivism could contribute to the prevention of extremist violence and research and how it can help to avoid reinforcing stigmas and re-establishing a confirmation bias

Perceptions of radicalisation in mental health care and the security domain: roles, responsibilities, and collaboration

This study investigates how perceptions of radicalisation and co-occurring mental health issues differ between mental health care and the security domain, and how these perceptions affect intersectoral collaboration. It is generally thought that intersectoral collaboration is a useful strategy for preventing radicalisation and terrorism, especially when it concerns radicalised persons with mental health issues. It is not clear, however, what perceptions professionals have of radicalisation and collaboration with other disciplines. Data was obtained from focus groups and individual interviews with practitioners and trainers from mental health care and the security domain in the Netherlands. The results show a lack of knowledge about radicalisation in mental health care, whereas in the security domain, there is little understanding of mental health issues. This leads to a mad-bad dichotomy which has a negative effect on collaboration and risk management. Improvement of the intersectoral collaboration by cross-domain familiarization, and strengthening of trust and mutual understanding, should begin with the basic training of professionals in both domains. The Care and Safety Houses in the Netherlands offer a sound base for intersectoral collaboration. Future professionals from different domains ought to be familiarized with each other’s possibilities, limitations, tasks, and roles

Perceptions of radicalisation in mental health care and the security domain: roles, responsibilities, and collaboration

ABSTRACT This study investigates how perceptions of radicalisation and co-occurring mental health issues differ between mental health care and the security domain, and how these perceptions affect intersectoral collaboration. It is generally thought that intersectoral collaboration is a useful strategy for preventing radicalisation and terrorism, especially when it concerns radicalised persons with mental health issues. It is not clear, however, what perceptions professionals have of radicalisation and collaboration with other disciplines. Data was obtained from focus groups and individual interviews with practitioners and trainers from mental health care and the security domain in the Netherlands. The results show a lack of knowledge about radicalisation in mental health care, whereas in the security domain, there is little understanding of mental health issues. This leads to a mad-bad dichotomy which has a negative effect on collaboration and risk management. Improvement of the intersectoral collaboration by cross-domain familiarization, and strengthening of trust and mutual understanding, should begin with the basic training of professionals in both domains. The Care and Safety Houses in the Netherlands offer a sound base for intersectoral collaboration. Future professionals from different domains ought to be familiarized with each other’s possibilities, limitations, tasks, and roles

Sensory processing and alcohol use in adults with autism spectrum disorder

The association between substance use and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is complex. Although sensory processing difficulties are highly prevalent in individuals with ASD, data on the association between sensory processing and substance use in ASD are limited. This study aimed to investigate the association between sensory processing patterns and alcohol use in adults with ASD. Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed on questionnaire data (Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Consumption) of 101 adults with ASD. Sensory processing difficulties are associated with alcohol use in adults with ASD. Differences in sensory processing between alcohol-based subgroups vary per specific sensory processing pattern: drinkers reported 6.5 to 8 points higher levels of low registration [χ 2(2) = 12.408, p = .002, 99 % CI (.002.002)], non-hazardous drinkers reported 9 points higher levels of sensory sensitivity [χ 2(2) = 6.868, p = .031, 99 % CI (.031, .032)], and hazardous drinkers reported 7.5 points higher levels of sensory seeking [χ 2(2) = 6.698, p = .034, 99 % CI (.034, .035)], all in comparison with non-drinkers on scales ranging from 15 to 75. Our proof-of-concept study indicates that vulnerability in some individuals with ASD for substance use disorders might be explained by sensory processing difficulties. Whether alcohol is used as 'self-medication' or is associated with other neurobiological vulnerabilities needs further investigation in larger follow-up studies. </p

The effect of dialectical behaviour therapy in autism spectrum patients with suicidality and/or self-destructive behaviour (DIASS):study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Background: Many persons with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are treated in long-term specialised care. In this population, suicidal behaviour troubles patients, families, and specialists in the field because it is difficult to treat. At present, there is no documented effective therapy for suicidal behaviour in ASD (Autism Research 7:507-521, 2014; Crisis 35:301-309, 2014). Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) is an efficacious treatment programme for chronically suicidal and/or self-harm behaviour in patients with Borderline Personality Disorder (J Psychiatry 166:1365-1374, 2014; Linehan MM. Cognitive behavioural therapy of borderline personality disorder. 1993). This study will evaluate the efficacy of DBT in persons with ASD and suicidal/self-destructive behaviour in a multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial. Method: One hundred twenty-eight persons with autism and suicidal and/or self-harming behaviour will be recruited from specialised mental healthcare services and randomised into two conditions: 1) the DBT condition in which the participants have weekly individual cognitive behavioural therapy sessions and a 2.5 h skills training group session twice per week during 6 months, and 2) the treatment as usual condition which consists of weekly individual therapy sessions of 30-45 min with a psychotherapist or social worker. Assessments will take place at baseline, at post-treatment (6 months), and after a follow-up period of 12 months. The mediators will also be assessed at 3 months. The primary outcome is the level of suicidal ideation and behaviour. The secondary outcomes are anxiety and social performance, depression, core symptoms of ASD, quality of life, and cost-utility. Emotion regulation and therapeutic alliance are hypothesised to mediate the effects on the primary outcome. Discussion: The results from this study will provide an evaluation of the efficacy of DBT treatment in persons with ASD on suicidal and self-harming behaviour. The study is conducted in routine mental health services which enhances the generalisability of the study results to clinical practice. Trial registration: ISRCTN96632579. Registered 1 May 2019. Retrospectively registered