Verbal Response Latency as a Behavioral Indicator of Diminished Wish to Live in a Clinical Sample of Active Duty Army Personnel with Recent Suicidal Ideation

Abstract

Objective

Research on risk factors of suicide attempt has yielded little improvement in imminent risk detection for clinicians, due in part to the inherent limitations of self-report methodologies. Therefore, objective behavioral indicators of suicide risk that can be implemented practically with little cost in clinical settings are needed.

Method

The current study examined verbal response latency, measured as the length of time to answer a question asking about reasons for living (i.e., What are your reasons for living or not killing yourself?), as a potential indicator of suicide risk among 97 active duty Army personnel presenting to an emergency department or behavioral health clinic for current suicide ideation and/or a recent suicide attempt.

Results

Verbal response latency was significantly correlated with diminished wish to live at the participant level but was not significantly correlated with wish to die or overall severity of suicidal ideation.

Conclusion

Verbal response latency may serve as an objective indicator of suicide risk.

Highlights

• Response latency to a life construct may be an objective indicator of suicide risk

• Delayed response latency is indicative of diminished wish to live

• Pathological mechanisms may manifest within dyadic interactions via verbal behaviors

Keywords:

• Risk assessment
• response latency
• wish to live

NOTES

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank Megan Puzia, M.S., for help with data analyses.

Author Notes

D. Nicolas Oakey-Frost, National Center for Veterans Studies, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.

Julia A. Harris, Erika M. Roberge, William C. Andres, Kelsi F. Rugo, AnnaBelle O. Bryan, and Craig J. Bryan, National Center for Veterans Studies, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.

Notes

1 Within the 87 participants measured across three time points, there were 250 missing cells within a participants’ time point which were removed from the analyses in accordance with MLM procedures. Of the 250 cells, 27.2% of missing data was from the response latency variable, (20.6% at baseline, 23.5% at the one-week follow-up, 36.8% at the six-month follow-up, and 19.1% at the 12-month follow-up). 13.2% of the missing data was from the BSSI (all missing data at baseline), and 46.0% from the DSI-SS (28.3% at baseline, 14.2% at the one-week follow-up, 22.1% at the six-month follow-up, and 35.4% at the 12-month follow-up) (Metalsky & Joiner, 1997; Beck et al., 1979).