CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 27Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Jumping to delusions in early psychosis

Langdon, Robyn, Still, Megan, Connors, Michael H., Ward, Philip B., Catts, Stanley V.·2014·Cognitive Neuropsychiatry
DOI 10.1080/13546805.2013.854198
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Patients with delusions typically seek less information when making decisions than controls ("jumping-to-conclusions", JTC) and paradoxically over-adjust to counter-evidence on probabilistic reasoning tasks. Previous studies have examined JTC bias across the delusion-prone continuum, but have not considered the co-occurrence of both biases at early stages of psychosis. This was our aim. METHOD: Twenty-three early psychosis patients and 19 healthy controls completed two versions of the probabilistic reasoning task: a "draws-to-decision" version (to assess JTC) and a "graded-estimates" version (to assess over-adjustment). Both versions have been used previously with clinically delusional people with schizophrenia. IQ, memory and executive function were also examined. RESULTS: Patients took fewer trials to reach a decision in the draws-to-decision version and showed greater over-adjustment to counter-evidence in the graded-estimates version than controls. Across groups, those who jumped to conclusions showed greater over-adjustment. Poor executive function predicted more extreme biases in controls but not in patients. Task performances were unrelated to memory. Similar results were evident in patient and control subgroups matched on IQ, and years of formal education. CONCLUSIONS: A jumping-to-conclusions bias and an over-adjustment bias co-occurred in the early psychosis patients. Implications are discussed concerning the role of such biases in delusion-proneness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13546805.2013.854198

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 uncertain decision settings, people with schizophrenia and delusions (or proneness to them) tend to rely on less information than people without schizophrenia.

    “When people with schizophrenia (who have or are prone to delusions) make decisions in an uncertain setting, they tend to draw on less information in reaching that decision than does a person without schizophrenia.”

    From Computational psychiatry: a Rosetta Stone linking the brain to mental illness (2014) · cites this paper as [5]

  • People with schizophrenia may also disregard evidence that contradicts their decision.

    “They might also ignore pieces of evidence that contradict that decision.”

    From Computational psychiatry: a Rosetta Stone linking the brain to mental illness (2014) · cites this paper as [5]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Langdon, R., Still, M., Connors, M. H., Ward, P. B., & Catts, S. V.
Affiliations
  • ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders (AU)
  • Sydney South West Area Health Service (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Connors, Michael H.
ORCID
Venue
Cognitive Neuropsychiatry
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2013-11-11
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
241-256
ISSN
  • 1354-6805 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0619
DOI
10.1080/13546805.2013.854198
OpenAlex
W2003048126
Cited by
27
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognitive Neuropsychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
jumping to conclusions bias, early psychosis, probabilistic reasoning, decision-making, executive function, counterevidence, delusions, schizophrenia
MeSH terms
Decision Making, Delusions, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Memory, Probability Learning, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenic Psychology, Thinking, Young Adult, Executive Function

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