Bridging the gap between research into biological and psychosocial models of psychosis

Abstract

Paul Bebbington's recent Special Article provides an excellent synthesis of recent advances in psychosocial research on psychosis. However, we doubt that a model based solely on social epidemiology and cognitive theory can totally describe psychosis, and to be fair, Bebbington does not suggest that it does. A complete model must also incorporate what we have learned from non-social epidemiology, neuroscience, and genetics. Evidence indicates that both the social risk factors that interest Bebbington and biological risk factors, such as abuse of stimulants and cannabis, can provoke psychotic symptoms by dysregulating striatal dopamine. The role of neurodevelopmental deviance also needs to be considered in the etiology of schizophrenia-like psychosis. Moreover, the striking advances in our understanding of the genetic architecture of psychosis open an exciting door into studies examining gene-environment correlation and gene-environment interaction. In short, Bebbington demonstrates the value of cognitive and social researchers talking to each other, but the occasional chat with the more biologically inclined could produce a more comprehensive model.