Cited by 1,462Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryHallucinations in medical conditions

Perceiving is believing: a Bayesian approach to explaining the positive symptoms of schizophrenia

Open access
Fletcher, Paul C., Frith, Chris D.·2009·Nature Reviews Neuroscience

Abstract

Hallucinations and delusions are striking features of schizophrenia that have been difficult to explain. Fletcher and Frith discuss cognitive theories of the positive symptoms of schizophrenia and describe how abnormalities in error-dependent learning could underlie both hallucinations and delusions. Advances in cognitive neuroscience offer us new ways to understand the symptoms of mental illness by uniting basic neurochemical and neurophysiological observations with the conscious experiences that characterize these symptoms. Cognitive theories about the positive symptoms of schizophrenia — hallucinations and delusions — have tended to treat perception and belief formation as distinct processes. However, recent advances in computational neuroscience have led us to consider the unusual perceptual experiences of patients and their sometimes bizarre beliefs as part of the same core abnormality — a disturbance in error-dependent updating of inferences and beliefs about the world. We suggest that it is possible to understand these symptoms in terms of a disturbed hierarchical Bayesian framework, without recourse to separate considerations of experience and belief.

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 · 10.1038/nrn2536

Cites

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?

  • In psychosis, false perceptions (hallucinations) and false beliefs (delusions) may arise from reshaping of top-down predictions in attempts to suppress aberrant and persistent exteroceptive prediction errors.

    “In psychosis, false perceptions (hallucinations) and false beliefs (delusions) may arise from reshaping of top-down predictions in attempts to suppress aberrant and persistent (exteroceptive) prediction errors [78].”

    From Interoceptive inference, emotion, and the embodied self (2013) · cites this paper as [78]

    The 'A hierarchy of prediction and model building' section says false prediction errors drive higher levels to adjust their models, while the Conclusions link disrupted inference to both false perceptions and false beliefs (page numbers unavailable). The claim's restriction to exteroceptive errors is not supported: the paper also discusses prediction errors involving internally generated speech and actions. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Delusions may arise as rational (Bayes-optimal) posterior beliefs that explain away precise sensory prediction errors.

    “they could arise as rational (Bayes-optimal) posterior beliefs that explain away precise sensory prediction errors: e.g., Fletcher and Frith (2009).”

    From The Computational Anatomy of Psychosis (2013) · cites this paper as Fletcher and Frith, 2009

    In “A hierarchy of prediction and model building” (page unavailable), the paper proposes that false prediction errors drive revisions of higher-level beliefs that can contribute to delusions. “From disrupted neurochemistry to beliefs” says errors given undue weight can lead to false inference. It does not characterize the resulting beliefs as Bayes-optimal, and says the revisions cannot fully resolve the false errors, rather than successfully explaining them away. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Disturbances in sensed agency arise not simply from predictive mismatches, but from pathologically imprecise predictions about the sensory consequences of action.

    “Following previous models (Fletcher and Frith, 2009; Synofzik et al., 2010), disturbances in sensed agency arise not simply from predictive mismatches, but from pathologically imprecise predictions about the sensory consequences of action.”

    From An Interoceptive Predictive Coding Model of Conscious Presence (2012) · cites this paper as Fletcher and Frith, 2009

    In “The physiological basis of positive symptoms” and “Efference copy” (pages unavailable), the paper links disturbed experience of self-generated actions to failures to predict and attenuate their sensory consequences. “From disrupted neurochemistry to beliefs” says the problem may lie not in prediction errors alone but in how their precision is estimated and used. It discusses the precision of prediction errors, however, rather than specifically attributing disturbed agency to pathologically imprecise predictions of action consequences. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Fletcher and Frith propose that, for positive symptoms in psychoses, a Bayesian perspective can accommodate hallucinations and delusions within a common framework.

    “Fletcher and Frith (2009) propose that, for positive symptoms in psychoses, a Bayesian perspective can accommodate hallucinations and delusions within a common framework”

    From An Interoceptive Predictive Coding Model of Conscious Presence (2012) · cites this paper as Fletcher and Frith, 2009

    The Conclusions propose a common Bayesian inference mechanism for hallucinations and delusions, supporting the central claim. The Abstract confines the review’s proposal to positive symptoms of schizophrenia, so the broader wording “in psychoses” is not established by this source. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Psychosis has been related to a decreased precision of prior beliefs and/or increased precision of sensory data.

    “Psychosis has been related to a decreased precision of prior beliefs and/or increased precision of sensory data (13, 24, 58–61).”

    From The Predictive Coding Account of Psychosis (2018) · cites this paper as [58]

    In “From disrupted neurochemistry to beliefs” (page unavailable), the review links psychotic inference to abnormal precision-weighting of prediction errors: even a small error may receive undue weight. This supports the increased-weight sensory-evidence side of the claim, but the passage does not specifically say that the precision of prior beliefs is decreased. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 117 · Cited by 1,462

Authors
Fletcher, P. C., & Frith, C. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
Frith, Chris D.
Venue
Nature Reviews Neuroscience
Published
2008-12-03
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
48-58
ISSN
  • 1471-003X (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0048
OpenAlex
W2070461647
Cited by
1,462
References
117
Citations by year
2026: 93 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 93 · 2023: 100 · 2022: 102 · 2021: 90 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 111 · 2018: 100 · 2017: 102 · 2016: 87 · 2015: 83 · 2014: 71 · 2013: 70 · 2012: 47
FWCI
5.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature reviews. Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (064351)
  • National Research Foundation
  • Danmarks Grundforskningsfond
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
Keywords
schizophrenia, positive symptoms, hallucinations, delusions, Bayesian inference, Bayesian hierarchical model, belief updating, perception, computational neuroscience
MeSH terms
Bayes Theorem, Brain, Cognition, Humans, Models, Neurological, Perception, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology

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