When clients' lives are not reflected in therapy, they struggle to apply the skills learned in treatment to everyday situations. In this pilot study, we determined if using clients' real-world interactions in therapy could effectively target metacognitive capacity-yielding improved symptoms and social functioning-by tailoring treatment to focus on issues faced by clients in daily life. Using a randomized controlled trial design, schizophrenia subjects with metacognitive deficits completed 24 sessions of: (a) Standard Metacognitive Reflection and Insight Therapy (MERIT); or (b) Tailored MERIT. Real-world interactions were captured via the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR), a smartphone application that passively records audio in daily life. All subjects wore the EAR; however, real-world interactions were only used to personalize sessions in Tailored MERIT. Feasibility and acceptability were shown; those in Tailored MERIT wore the EAR 84% of their waking hours and reported minimal burden. When compared to Standard MERIT, Tailored MERIT participants showed large pre-post reductions in negative metacognitive beliefs and disorganized symptoms. Small, but nonsignificant, improvements in social functioning were also observed. Compared to an evidence-based benchmark, we observed that real-world interactions can be used to tailor metacognitive therapy and improve outcomes in schizophrenia. Tailored MERIT has the potential to impact practice by personalizing treatment to account for individual variations in environment and lifestyle-aligning with the Precision Medicine Initiative-in a way that is not possible with current therapy. This is particularly salient in schizophrenia, where limited insight and cognitive deficits often make subjective reporting unreliable. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The “emotion paradox” of schizophrenia suggests people with schizophrenia demonstrate deficits when reporting anticipated and retrospective pleasure; yet, in-the-moment, consummatory pleasure is largely intact. It is uncertain how these findings extend to social situations. This meta-analysis aimed to (1) determine the mean difference in consummatory social pleasure between people with schizophrenia and healthy controls, and (2) examine moderators of this effect, including study design and clinical characteristics of participants. A literature search using PsycINFO, Web of Science, Pubmed, and EMBASE databases was conducted. Studies measuring consummatory social pleasure using experience sampling methods and laboratory social simulations were included. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted using Hedge’s g. Meta-analysis of 26 studies suggests people with schizophrenia exhibited a small, significant deficit in consummatory social pleasure (g = −0.38, 90% CI [−0.53, −0.22]). There was significant heterogeneity in effect sizes; magnitude was moderated by study design and type of measure used to assess social pleasure. Overall, people with schizophrenia seem to exhibit less consummatory social pleasure than controls. However, this deficit is smaller than in studies of anticipated and retrospective pleasure. Thus, consummatory social pleasure may not be quite as impaired in people with schizophrenia as traditional anhedonia research suggests. Moreover, pleasure deficits observed in people with schizophrenia may result from differences in the quality of their daily social experiences rather than differences in their capacity for social pleasure. Results have important implications for clinical interventions that address barriers to social engagement, low-pleasure beliefs, and cognitive remediation to treat schizophrenia.