| Literature DB >> 35210676 |
Doyel Ghosh1, Pritha Mukhopadhyay2, Ishani Chatterjee2, Prasanta Kumar Roy1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a gap in understanding the pathogenesis of dissociative conversion disorder (DCD), despite the disorder having a strong historical root. The role of personality and neurocognitive factors are now highlighted; however, inconsistencies are reported. This study explores the personality disposition, arousability, and decision-making ability of patients with DCD, in reference to a healthy control group (HCG).Entities:
Keywords: Hysteria; cognitive arousability; conversion reaction; decision making; reaction time
Year: 2021 PMID: 35210676 PMCID: PMC8826191 DOI: 10.1177/0253717620981555
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian J Psychol Med ISSN: 0253-7176
Comparison of DDG and HCG on Sociodemographic Variables
| DDG | HCG | U/X2 Score | P Value | |
| Age | 25.60 ± 7.50 | 26.50 ± 7.84 | 46.00 | 0.78 |
| Education | 11.00 ± 1.49 | 10.60 ± 1.07 | 42.00 | 0.53 |
| Marital Status | ||||
| Married | 7 (70%) | 6 (60%) | 0.22 | 0.64 |
| Single | 3 (30%) | 4 (40%) | ||
DDG: dissociative disorder group, HCG: healthy control group, U: Mann–Whitney U, X2: chi-square, SD: standard deviation.
Significant values are highlighted in bold.
Comparison of DDG and HCG on Dispositional, RT, and Decision-Making Ability Variables
| Variables | DDG (N1 = 10) | HCG (N2 = 10) | Mann–Whitney U | P Value | dCohen |
| Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | ||||
| Dispositional | |||||
| Novelty seeking (NS) | 56.50 ± 26.67 | 28.10 ± 21.52 | 21.00 |
|
|
| Harm avoidance (HA) | 80.90 ± 20.46 | 32.40 ± 23.97 | 7.50 |
|
|
| Reward dependence (RD) | 36.00 ± 13.90 | 23.20 ± 14.23 | 20.00 |
|
|
| Persistence (P) | 39.90 ± 27.78 | 65.30 ± 25.49 | 24.50 |
|
|
| Self-directedness (SD) | 6.00 ± 10.28 | 62.50 ± 17.03 | 1.50 |
|
|
| Cooperativeness (C) | 21.80 ± 14.26 | 15.30 ± 17.31 | 32.00 | 0.171 | – |
| Self-transcendence (ST) | 66.30 ± 26.12 | 30.50 ± 27.83 | 15.00 |
|
|
| RT fore period | |||||
| 1 s | 0.90 ± 0.35 | 0.69 ± 0.23 | 31.00 | 0.151 | – |
| 2 s | 0.92 ± 0.41 | 0.62 ± 0.18 | 22.00 |
|
|
| 3 s | 1.18 ± 0.51 | 0.59 ± 0.17 | 13.00 |
|
|
| Net score of gambling task | |||||
| Set 2 | 2.60 ± 2.83 | 1.80 ± 4.26 | 40.50 | 0.459 | – |
| Set 3 | 2.90 ± 3.90 | 7.4 ± 7.06 | 24.50 |
|
|
| Set 4 | 3.20 ± 4.92 | 8.20 ± 7.08 | 27.50 | 0.086 | – |
| Set 5 | 1.00 ± 3.29 | 7.20 ± 5.34 | 15.50 |
|
|
DDG: dissociative disorder group, HCG: healthy control group, RT: reaction time.
Figure 1.Comparison of RTs Across Three Fore Periods in DDG and HCG
DDG: dissociative disorder group, HCG: healthy control group, RT: reaction time.
Figure 2.Comparison of Net Scores Across Four Blocks of Gambling Task in DDG and HCG
DDG: dissociative disorder group, HCG: healthy control group.
Association/Correlation Between Temperament-Character Variables and RT with Total Net Gain Score of IGT
| Domain | DDG | HCG |
| Novelty seeking (NS) | –0.69* | –0.15 |
| Harm avoidance (HA) | 0.04 | 0.08 |
| Reward dependence (RD) | 0.64* | –0.27 |
| Persistence (P) | –0.17 | –0.48 |
| Self-directedness (SD) | 0.44 | 0.02 |
| Cooperativeness (C) | 0.50 | –0.24 |
| Self-transcendence (ST) | 0.55 | 0.43 |
| RT 1 s | 0.33 | 0.02 |
| RT 2 s | 0.37 | –0.03 |
| RT 3 s | 0.49 | –0.10 |
*Significant at P < 0.05. DDG: dissociative disorder group, HCG: healthy control group, RT: reaction time.
Figure 3.Psychopathology Formation in Dissociative Disorder