Literature DB >> 34554260

Unstable Belief Formation and Slowed Decision-making: Evidence That the Jumping-to-Conclusions Bias in Schizophrenia Is Not Linked to Impulsive Decision-making.

Wolfgang Strube1,2, Camelia Lucia Cimpianu1, Miriam Ulbrich1, Ömer Faruk Öztürk1,3, Thomas Schneider-Axmann1, Peter Falkai1, Louise Marshall4, Sven Bestmann4,5, Alkomiet Hasan2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Jumping-to-conclusions (JTC) is a prominent reasoning bias in schizophrenia (SCZ). While it has been linked to not only psychopathological abnormalities (delusions and impulsive decision-making) but also unstable belief formation, its origin remains unclear. We here directly test to which extend JTC is associated with delusional ideation, impulsive decision-making, and unstable belief formation.
METHODS: In total, 45 SCZ patients were compared with matched samples of 45 patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and 45 healthy controls (HC) as delusions and JTC also occur in other mental disorders and the general population. Participants performed a probabilistic beads task. To test the association of JTC with measures of delusions (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS]positive, PANSSpositive-factor, and Peter Delusions Inventory [PDI]), Bayesian linear regressions were computed. For the link between JTC and impulsive decision-making and unstable beliefs, we conducted between-group comparisons of "draws to decision" (DTD), "decision times" (DT), and "disconfirmatory evidence scores" (DES).
RESULTS: Bayesian regression obtained no robust relationship between PDI and DTD (all |R2adj| ≤ .057, all P ≥ .022, all Bayes Factors [BF01] ≤ 0.046; α adj = .00833). Compared with MDD and HC, patients with SCZ needed more time to decide (significantly higher DT in ambiguous trials: all P ≤ .005, r2 ≥ .216; numerically higher DT in other trials). Further, SCZ had unstable beliefs about the correct source jar whenever unexpected changes in bead sequences (disconfirmatory evidence) occurred (compared with MDD: all P ≤ .004 and all r2 ≥ .232; compared with HC: numerically higher DES). No significant correlation was observed between DT and DTD (all P ≥ .050).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings point toward a relationship of JTC with unstable belief formation and do not support the assumption that JTC is associated with impulsive decision-making.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  beads task; jumping-to-conclusions (JTC) bias; probabilistic reasoning; schizophrenia; slowed decision-making; unstable belief-formation

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34554260      PMCID: PMC8886605          DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbab108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Schizophr Bull        ISSN: 0586-7614            Impact factor:   7.348


  54 in total

1.  G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.

Authors:  Franz Faul; Edgar Erdfelder; Albert-Georg Lang; Axel Buchner
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2007-05

2.  Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering.

Authors:  Robert Malcolm Ross; Ryan McKay; Max Coltheart; Robyn Langdon
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2015-01-22       Impact factor: 9.306

3.  Examining reasoning biases in schizophrenia using a modified "Jumping to Conclusions" probabilistic reasoning task.

Authors:  Hans S Klein; Amy E Pinkham
Journal:  Psychiatry Res       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 3.222

4.  A distinct inferential mechanism for delusions in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Seth C Baker; Anna B Konova; Nathaniel D Daw; Guillermo Horga
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 13.501

5.  The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia.

Authors:  S R Kay; A Fiszbein; L A Opler
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 9.306

6.  The jumping to conclusions bias in delusions: specificity and changeability.

Authors:  Tania M Lincoln; Michael Ziegler; Stephanie Mehl; Winfried Rief
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  2010-02

7.  The exact analysis of contingency tables in medical research.

Authors:  C R Mehta
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.021

Review 8.  'Jumping to conclusions' data-gathering bias in psychosis and other psychiatric disorders - Two meta-analyses of comparisons between patients and healthy individuals.

Authors:  Suzanne Ho-Wai So; Nicolson Yat-Fan Siu; Hau-Lam Wong; Wai Chan; Philippa Anne Garety
Journal:  Clin Psychol Rev       Date:  2016-05-13

Review 9.  The past and future of delusions research: from the inexplicable to the treatable.

Authors:  P A Garety; D Freeman
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 9.319

10.  Jumping to conclusions, general intelligence, and psychosis liability: findings from the multi-centre EU-GEI case-control study.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.