Cited by 52Hallucinations in medical conditionsSchizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and Psychiatry

The influence of semantic top-down processing in auditory verbal hallucinations

Open access
Daalman, Kirstin, Verkooijen, Sanne, Derks, Eske M., Aleman, André, Sommer, Iris E.C.·2012·Schizophrenia Research

Abstract

Background Auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH) are one of the most prominent symptoms of schizophrenia but have also been reported in the general population. Several cognitive models have tried to elucidate the mechanism behind auditory verbal hallucinations, among which a top-down model. According to this model, perception is biased towards top-down information (e.g., expectations), reducing the influence of bottom-up information coming from the sense organs. This bias predisposes to false perceptions, i.e., hallucinations.Methods The current study investigated this hypothesis in non-psychotic individuals with frequent AVH, psychotic patients with AVH and healthy control subjects by applying a semantic top-down task. In this task, top-down processes are manipulated through the semantic context of a sentence. In addition, the association between hallucination proneness and semantic top-down errors was investigated.Results Non-psychotic individuals with AVH made significantly more top-down errors compared to healthy controls, while overall accuracy was similar. The number of top-down errors, corrected for overall accuracy, in the patient group was in between those of the other two groups and did not differ significantly from either the non-psychotic individuals with AVH or the healthy controls. The severity of hallucination proneness correlated with the number of top-down errors.Discussion These findings confirm that non-psychotic individuals with AVH are stronger influenced by top-down processing (i.e., perceptual expectations) than healthy controls. In contrast, our data suggest that in psychotic patients semantic expectations do not play a role in the etiology of AVH. This finding may point towards different cognitive mechanisms for pathological and nonpathological hallucinations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.schres.2012.06.005

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • People with non-clinical voice-hearing appear to be particularly susceptible to semantic expectation effects when instructed to monitor for speech in white noise.

    “In behavioural studies, people with NCVH appear to be particularly susceptible to semantic expectation effects when instructed to monitor for speech in white noise (Daalman et al., 2012), a result similar to effects seen in clinical voice-hearers and members of the general population who report milder, hallucination-like experiences (Fernyhough et al., 2007;Vercammen et al., 2008;Vercammen and Ale”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Daalman, K., Verkooijen, S., Derks, E. M., Aleman, A., & Sommer, I. E. C.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
Corresponding author
Daalman, Kirstin
Venue
Schizophrenia Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-08
Volume
139
Issue
1-3
Pages
82-86
ISSN
0920-9964 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2160311591
Cited by
52
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
auditory verbal hallucinations, top-down processing
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Female, Hallucinations, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Perceptual Distortion, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, Semantics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review