Table 5.
Correlations of psychophysiological measurements with cognitive and emotion recognition tests.
| RHR | RMSSD | SDNN | LF/HF | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | CHR-N | CHR-P | CON | CHR-N | CHR-P | CON | CHR-N | CHR-P | CON | CHR-N | CHR-P | |
| BACS | ||||||||||||
| Token motor | ns | ns | −0.27 [−0.46, −0.10] 0.003** |
ns | ns | 0.34 [0.15, 0.51] < 0.001*** |
ns | ns | 0.28 [0.08, 0.44] 0.003** |
ns | ns | −0.20 [−0.36, −0.02] 0.035* |
| Symbol coding | −0.3 [−0.53, 0.00] 0.039* |
ns | −0.16 [−0.34, 0.03] 0.089 |
ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | −0.27 [−0.56, 0.08] 0.098 |
−0.16 [−0.34, 0.03] 0.092 |
| CNB—Emotion recognition task | ||||||||||||
| Correct anger | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | −0.18 [−0.34, −0.01] 0.052 |
ns | ns | ns |
| Correct fear | ns | ns | ns | −0.24 [−0.51, 0.07] 0.093 |
ns | ns | −0.27 [−0.53, 0.03] 0.061 |
ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| Correct happy | −0.33 [−0.57, 0.02] 0.022* |
ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | 0.29 [−0.01, 0.51] 0.048 |
ns | 0.16 [−0.04, 0.32] 0.090 |
| Correct no emotion | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | −0.19 [−0.35, −0.01] 0.047* |
| Correct sad | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | −0.35 [−0.62, 0.02] 0.033* |
ns | ns | ns | ns |
Spearmans's two-sided correlation with bias-corrected and accelerated (BCa) 2,000 samples bootstrap 0.95 confidence interval, corrected for ties (ρ [95% CI], p). BACS and CBN scores were standardized to control group data, controlled for sex category. A Composite score was calculated following (44). CON, healthy controls; CHR-N, clinical high risk-negative; CHR-P, clinical high risk-positive; RHr, resting heart rate; RMSSD, square root of the mean squared differences of successive normal-to-normal intervals; SDNN, standard deviation of normal-to-normal heart beat intervals; LF/HF, ratio of low and high frequency power.