青少年抑郁症患者的社会决策行为研究  

Research on social decision-making behaviors of adolescent depression patients

作　　者：尹胜健 袁晓菲[1] 陈旭[1] 郑毅[1] Yuan Xiaofei;Chen Xu;Zheng Yi(Beijing Key Laboratory of Mental Disorders,National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders&National Center for Mental Disorders,Beijing Anding Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 100088,China)

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学附属北京安定医院、国家精神疾病医学中心、国家精神心理疾病临床医学研究中心、精神疾病诊断与治疗北京市重点实验室,100088

出　　处：《神经疾病与精神卫生》2023年第6期420-426,共7页Journal of Neuroscience and Mental Health

基　　金：首都医科大学附属北京安定医院院级课题(YX2019-05,YX2021-06)。

摘　　要：目的探讨青少年抑郁症患者社会决策行为的异常,比较其社会功能情况。方法选取2020年9月至2021年2月在北京安定医院门诊就诊或住院的49例青少年抑郁症患者,以及在附近社区招募的25名健康对照者为研究对象。采用17项汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD-17)、患者健康问卷抑郁量表(PHQ-9)、广泛性焦虑量表(GAD-7)比较两组受试者的抑郁、焦虑情况。采用重复测量方差分析比较两组受试者对于最后通牒博弈范式方案的接受率和反应时的差异,并于任务结束后采用任务后问卷评估两组受试者对方案公平性的认知差异。结果抑郁症组患者的HAMD-17、PHQ-9和GAD-7评分高于健康对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组受试者的接受率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在接受率方面,公平性的主效应有统计学意义(F=201.760,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.737),公平性与提议者类别之间存在交互作用(F=8.791,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.109)。两组受试者的反应时比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在反应时方面,方案公平性的主效应有统计学意义(F=42.755,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.373),方案提议者的主效应有统计学意义(F=5.333,P<0.05,partial η^(2)=0.069),公平性与提议者之间存在交互作用(F=8.946,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.111)。两组受试者的任务后问卷总分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但抑郁症组任务后问卷中问题1的评分为6.4(1.0,10.0)分,低于健康对照组的8.0(2.0,10.0)分,差异有统计学意义(Z=-3.235,P<0.01)。结论青少年抑郁症患者的社会决策行为未见明显异常,这与其对分配方案的公平性认知相关。Objective To explore the abnormal social decision-making behavior of adolescent depression patients,so as to reflect the problem of its social function.Methods From September 2020 to February 2021,a total of 49 adolescent patients who were treated in outpatient or inpatient department of Beijing Anding Hospital and 25 healthy adolescents in community were selected as research subjects.Hamilton Depression Scale-17(HAMD-17),the Patient Health Questionnaire-9(PHQ-9)and Generalized Anxiety Disorder(GAD-7)were applied to assess patients'depression and anxiety symptoms.The repeated measurement ANOVA was used to compare the difference in the acceptance rate and reaction time of the ultimatum game paradigm scheme between the two groups of subjects,and the post task questionnaire was used to assess the cognitive difference between the two groups of subjects on the fairness of the scheme after the task was completed.Results The HAMD-17,PHQ-9,and GAD-7 scores of patients in the depression group were higher than those in the healthy control group,with statistically significant differences(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in acceptance rates between the two groups of subjects(P<0.05).In terms of acceptance rate,the main effect of fairness is statistically significant(F=201.760,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.737),and there is an interaction between fairness and proposer categories(F=8.791,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.109).There was no statistically significant difference in reaction time between the two groups of subjects(P<0.05).In terms of reaction time,the main effect of scheme fairness is statistically significant(F=42.755,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.373),and the main effect of the scheme proposer is statistically significant(F=5.333,P<0.05,partial η^(2)=0.069).There is an interaction between fairness and proposers(F=8.946,P<0.01,partial η^(2)=0.111).There is no statistically significant difference in the total score of the post task questionnaire between the two groups of subjects(P<0.05).However,the score of q

关 键 词：青少年 抑郁症 最后通牒博弈 社会决策行为 社会功能 

分 类 号：R749.4[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]