The relationship of action, affect, and metacognition in functional seizures

Metacognition provides a lens through which individuals experience, interpret, and respond to their affective states and behavior; it might thus influence complex neuropsychiatric conditions such as functional seizures - events characterized by states of heightened affective arousal and the disinhibition of prepotent behavior. In this pilot study, we aimed to establish a better understanding of the role of metacognition in functional seizures and its relationship to affective arousal and behavioral disinhibition (i.e., problems in suppressing prepared behavior). We hypothesized that affective arousal is related to higher behavioral disinhibition as well as slower reaction times, that affect and action (performing vs. not performing a movement) are related to memory and metacognition, and that metacognition is related to illness characteristics.

We used a combination of an emotional go/no-go and a metacognitive recognition task with affectively valenced and neutral images in 18 patients with functional seizures. We compared markers of behavioral inhibition as well as indices for memory and metacognitive performance between affective (vs. neutral) and action/go (vs. inhibition/no-go) conditions.

Contrary to our hypothesis, behavioral disinhibition was not different between conditions. However, we found slower reaction times for affectively valenced stimuli. Memory performance and metacognition were better for affectively valenced pictures and for pictures used in go trials (i.e., associated with action/performing the movement). Illness factors (illness duration, seizure frequency, levels of self-reported anxiety) were correlated with aspects of metacognition.

This pilot study offers first insights into alterations in metacognition related to action and affect in patients with functional seizures; specifically, that affectively valenced stimuli and active engagement are related to enhanced memory and metacognition. This relationship was also found with respect to illness factors. These results provide insight into potentially underlying pathomechanisms, although the lack of a control group limits evaluating the specificity of these findings.