CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 794Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryHallucinations in medical conditions

Cognitive approaches to delusions: a critical review of theories and evidence.

Garety, Philippa A., Freeman, Daniel·1999·British Journal of Clinical Psychology
DOI 10.1348/014466599162700
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: To review critically the evidence for three contemporary theories of delusions. METHODS: The theoretical approaches to delusions proposed by Frith and colleagues ('theory of mind' deficits), Garety and colleagues (multi-factorial, but involving probabilistic reasoning biases) and Bentall and colleagues (attributional style and self-discrepancies) are summarised. The findings of empirical papers directly relevant to these proposals are critically reviewed. These papers were identified by computerised literature searches (for the years 1987-1997) and a hand search. RESULTS: The evidence does not unequivocally support any of the approaches as proposed. However, strong evidence is found to support modifications of Garety and colleagues' and Bentall and colleagues' theories. Studies have replicated a 'jumping to conclusions' data-gathering bias and an externalising attributional bias in people with delusions. There is preliminary evidence for a 'theory of mind' deficit, as proposed by Frith, although possibly related to a more general reasoning bias. Evidence for an underlying discrepancy between ideal and actual self-representations is weaker. CONCLUSIONS: A multi-factorial model of delusion formation and maintenance incorporating a data-gathering bias and attributional style, together with other factors (e.g. perceptual processing, meta-representation) is consistent with the current evidence. It is recommended that these findings be incorporated into cognitive therapy approaches. However, there are limitations to existing research. Future studies should incorporate longitudinal designs and first episode studies, and should not neglect the co-morbidity of delusions, including affective processes, or the multi-dimensional nature of delusions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/014466599162700

Cites

90 of 90 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?

  • Delusional patients jump to conclusions in the draws-to-decision version of the beads task, while they are more willing to revise their decision in light of contradictory evidence in the probability estimates version.

    “delusional patients “jump to conclusions” in the first version, while they are more willing to revise their decision in light of contradictory evidence in the second (Garety and Freeman, 1999).”

    From The Computational Anatomy of Psychosis (2013) · cites this paper as Garety and Freeman, 1999

  • The concept of MCT by Moritz and Woodward was originally inspired by research on cognitive biases in psychosis and aims to convey metacognitive knowledge and raise metacognitive awareness for dysfunctional thought patterns.

    “The concept of MCT by Moritz and Woodward was originally inspired by research on cognitive biases in psychosis (65) and aims to convey metacognitive knowledge and raise metacognitive awareness for dysfunctional thought patterns (60, 122).”

    From Developing a mechanism-based therapy for acute psychiatric inpatients with psychotic symptoms: an Intervention Mapping approach (2023) · cites this paper as [65]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 93 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Garety, P. A., & Freeman, D.
Affiliations
University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Garety, Philippa A.
ORCID
Venue
British Journal of Clinical Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-06
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
113-154
ISSN
  • 0144-6657 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8260
DOI
10.1348/014466599162700
OpenAlex
W2169951193
Cited by
794
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 45
FWCI
10.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 4224 d)
Locations
  • British Journal of Clinical Psychology (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
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
Keywords
delusions, theory of mind deficits, jumping to conclusions bias, attributional style, self-discrepancy, cognitive therapy, schizophrenia
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Cognition Disorders, Cognitive Dissonance, Delusions, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Paranoid Disorders, Personality, Self Concept, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

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