Cited by 57Schizophrenia research and treatmentHallucinations in medical conditionsVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Delusion Proneness is Linked to a Reduced Usage of Prior Beliefs in Perceptual Decisions

Open access
Stuke, Heiner, Weilnhammer, Veith Andreas, Sterzer, Philipp, Schmack, Katharina·2018·Schizophrenia Bulletin

Abstract

Predictive coding theories state an aberrant weighting of prior beliefs and present sensory information as a core computational pathology in psychosis. Specifically, it has been proposed that the influence of prior beliefs which attenuate improbable sensory information is weakened, resulting in an overweighing of this potentially misleading information. However, it is currently unclear whether this alteration is specific to perceptual processes or whether it represents a more pervasive deficit that extends to cognitive processes. Here, we carried out 2 behavioral experiments that probed the usage of priors during perceptual and cognitive processes, respectively, in 123 healthy individuals with varying degrees of delusion proneness. In an audio-visual perceptual discrimination task, participants had to judge the global motion direction of random dot kinematograms. Prior beliefs were induced by auditory cues that probabilistically predicted the global motion direction of the dot kinematograms, allowing us to measure the impact of prior beliefs on perceptual decision making. A control experiment paralleled the design of the perceptual decision making task in the domain of cognitive decision making. By fitting the participants' responses with a probabilistic decision model, we quantified the impact of prior beliefs on participants' decisions in both tasks. With growing delusion proneness, we found a decreased impact of prior beliefs on perceptual but not on cognitive decision making. Our results show that delusion proneness is linked to a specifically reduced usage of prior beliefs in perceptual decisions, thereby empirically substantiating predictive coding theories of psychosis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/schbul/sbx189

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stuke, H., Weilnhammer, V. A., Sterzer, P., & Schmack, K.
Affiliations
Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Stuke, Heiner
Venue
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Published
2018-01-20
Volume
45
Issue
1
Pages
80-86
ISSN
  • 0586-7614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-1701
OpenAlex
W2794626614
Cited by
57
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6
FWCI
3.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01ZX1404A)
  • Charité — Universitätsmedizin
  • Berlin Institute of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
delusion proneness, prior beliefs
MeSH terms
Adult, Auditory Perception, Decision Making, Delusions, Discrimination, Psychological, Female, Humans, Male, Motion Perception, Visual Perception, Young Adult

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