INTRODUCTION: People with delusional beliefs "jump to conclusions" (JTC). This finding is well replicated. However, there is only limited exploration of the factors that might lead a person to JTC. The aim of the present study was to explore the contribution of working memory processes (WM) and IQ to hasty decision making and to investigate the stability of this bias over time. METHODS: A single group cross-sectional design was utilised. The study was conducted in 2 phases: (1) an initial screening phase and (2) an experimental phase whereby we explored and tested hypotheses regarding the cognitive origins of the JTC bias. In Study 1, participants completed the beads task as well as measures of mood and symptoms. In Study 2, the same participants repeated the beads task, and completed a battery of neuropsychological tests designed to assess different facets of WM and IQ. RESULTS: In most cases, "jumpers" were indistinguishable from "nonjumpers" in terms of their neuropsychological profiles. The only exception to this pattern was for visual working memory, in which "jumpers" performed better than "nonjumpers". In terms of the temporal stability of the JTC bias, 8 individuals (out of the 29) effectively switched from being "jumpers" at T1 to "nonjumpers" at T2. CONCLUSIONS: This study casts doubt on reduced global WM as an explanation of JTC. Rather it may be that the differences in reasoning are related to the manipulation of visual material and do not extend to other areas of neuropsychological functioning. However, as our sample is small it may be underpowered to detect important differences. Future work is therefore needed to replicate these findings.
INTRODUCTION:People with delusional beliefs "jump to conclusions" (JTC). This finding is well replicated. However, there is only limited exploration of the factors that might lead a person to JTC. The aim of the present study was to explore the contribution of working memory processes (WM) and IQ to hasty decision making and to investigate the stability of this bias over time. METHODS: A single group cross-sectional design was utilised. The study was conducted in 2 phases: (1) an initial screening phase and (2) an experimental phase whereby we explored and tested hypotheses regarding the cognitive origins of the JTC bias. In Study 1, participants completed the beads task as well as measures of mood and symptoms. In Study 2, the same participants repeated the beads task, and completed a battery of neuropsychological tests designed to assess different facets of WM and IQ. RESULTS: In most cases, "jumpers" were indistinguishable from "nonjumpers" in terms of their neuropsychological profiles. The only exception to this pattern was for visual working memory, in which "jumpers" performed better than "nonjumpers". In terms of the temporal stability of the JTC bias, 8 individuals (out of the 29) effectively switched from being "jumpers" at T1 to "nonjumpers" at T2. CONCLUSIONS: This study casts doubt on reduced global WM as an explanation of JTC. Rather it may be that the differences in reasoning are related to the manipulation of visual material and do not extend to other areas of neuropsychological functioning. However, as our sample is small it may be underpowered to detect important differences. Future work is therefore needed to replicate these findings.
Authors: Wolfgang Strube; Camelia Lucia Cimpianu; Miriam Ulbrich; Ömer Faruk Öztürk; Thomas Schneider-Axmann; Peter Falkai; Louise Marshall; Sven Bestmann; Alkomiet Hasan Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 7.348
Authors: Ana Catalan; Claudia J P Simons; Sonia Bustamante; Nora Olazabal; Eduardo Ruiz; Maider Gonzalez de Artaza; Alberto Penas; Claudio Maruottolo; Claudio Maurottolo; Andrea González; Jim van Os; Miguel Angel Gonzalez-Torres Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Philippa Garety; Eileen Joyce; Suzanne Jolley; Richard Emsley; Helen Waller; Elizabeth Kuipers; Paul Bebbington; David Fowler; Graham Dunn; Daniel Freeman Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2013-09-25 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Anna O Ermakova; Pranathi Ramachandra; Philip R Corlett; Paul C Fletcher; Graham K Murray Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-07-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Suzanne Jolley; Claire Thompson; James Hurley; Evelina Medin; Lucy Butler; Paul Bebbington; Graham Dunn; Daniel Freeman; David Fowler; Elizabeth Kuipers; Philippa Garety Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2014-06-04 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Giada Tripoli; Diego Quattrone; Laura Ferraro; Charlotte Gayer-Anderson; Victoria Rodriguez; Caterina La Cascia; Daniele La Barbera; Crocettarachele Sartorio; Fabio Seminerio; Ilaria Tarricone; Domenico Berardi; Andrei Szöke; Celso Arango; Andrea Tortelli; Pierre-Michel Llorca; Lieuwe de Haan; Eva Velthorst; Julio Bobes; Miguel Bernardo; Julio Sanjuán; Jose Luis Santos; Manuel Arrojo; Cristina Marta Del-Ben; Paulo Rossi Menezes; Jean-Paul Selten; Peter B Jones; Hannah E Jongsma; James B Kirkbride; Antonio Lasalvia; Sarah Tosato; Alex Richards; Michael O'Donovan; Bart Pf Rutten; Jim van Os; Craig Morgan; Pak C Sham; Robin M Murray; Graham K Murray; Marta Di Forti Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2020-04-24 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: M Aurora Falcone; Robin M Murray; Benjamin D R Wiffen; Jennifer A O'Connor; Manuela Russo; Anna Kolliakou; Simona Stilo; Heather Taylor; Poonam Gardner-Sood; Alessandra Paparelli; Fatima Jichi; Marta Di Forti; Anthony S David; Daniel Freeman; Suzanne Jolley Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2014-07-22 Impact factor: 9.306