期刊
COGNITIVE NEUROPSYCHIATRY
卷 16, 期 5, 页码 422-447出版社
PSYCHOLOGY PRESS
DOI: 10.1080/13546805.2010.548678
关键词
Bayesian reasoning; Jumping-to-Conclusions; Paranoia; Psychosis; Sequential probability ratio test
类别
资金
- Gatsby Charitable Foundation
Introduction. When deciding about the cause underlying serially presented events, patients with delusions utilise fewer events than controls, showing a Jumping-to-Conclusions'' bias. This has been widely hypothesised to be because patients expect to incur higher costs if they sample more information. This hypothesis is, however, unconfirmed. Methods. The hypothesis was tested by analysing patient and control data using two models. The models provided explicit, quantitative variables characterising decision making. One model was based on calculating the potential costs of making a decision; the other compared a measure of certainty to a fixed threshold. Results. Differences between paranoid participants and controls were found, but not in the way that was previously hypothesised. A greater noise'' in decision making (relative to the effective motivation to get the task right), rather than greater perceived costs, best accounted for group differences. Paranoid participants also deviated from ideal Bayesian reasoning more than healthy controls. Conclusions. The Jumping-to-Conclusions Bias is unlikely to be due to an overestimation of the cost of gathering more information. The analytic approach we used, involving a Bayesian model to estimate the parameters characterising different participant populations, is well suited to testing hypotheses regarding hidden'' variables underpinning observed behaviours.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据