• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在较少妄想倾向的人中,仓促下结论的情况更少?更可靠的珠子任务的初步证据。

Jumping to conclusions in the less-delusion-prone? Preliminary evidence from a more reliable beads task.

机构信息

College of Education, Psychology and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia; ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.

College of Education, Psychology and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.

出版信息

J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2020 Sep;68:101562. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2020.101562. Epub 2020 Feb 19.

DOI:10.1016/j.jbtep.2020.101562
PMID:32105906
Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Several meta-analyses have shown that people with psychosis tend to gather less information (i.e., they make fewer draws to decision, or DTD) on the beads task than healthy controls. A single meta-analysis has also found a small negative association between delusion-proneness and DTD in healthy samples, but with considerable heterogeneity.

METHODS

We used the new and more reliable "distractor sequences" beads task to clarify the nature of the relationship between delusion-proneness and DTD in a healthy sample. Healthy participants (N = 203) completed the distractor sequences beads task and the Peters Delusions Inventory (PDI), which measures delusion-proneness.

RESULTS

PDI and DTD were positively correlated, and those who jumped to conclusions (DTD ≤ 2) had lower PDI than those who did not. Comparing PDI quartiles on DTD provided some evidence the positive association did not extend to the highest PDI quartile. We found that DTD and delusion-proneness were positively related in our non-clinical sample, which was unexpected.

LIMITATIONS

Results need replication with a clinical sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the well-established association between the JTC bias and clinical delusions, the current finding may reflect a relationship that differs between non-clinical and clinically significant delusional groups, or one which reverses sign at some level of delusion-proneness.

摘要

背景与目的

几项荟萃分析表明,精神病患者在珠子任务上收集的信息较少(即,他们的决策次数较少,或 DTD),而健康对照组则较多。一项单一的荟萃分析还发现,健康样本中妄想倾向与 DTD 之间存在较小的负相关,但存在较大的异质性。

方法

我们使用新的、更可靠的“干扰序列”珠子任务,在健康样本中阐明妄想倾向与 DTD 之间的关系本质。健康参与者(N=203)完成了干扰序列珠子任务和彼得斯妄想量表(PDI),用于测量妄想倾向。

结果

PDI 和 DTD 呈正相关,那些急于下结论的人(DTD≤2)的 PDI 低于那些没有的人。在 DTD 上比较 PDI 四分位数提供了一些证据,表明这种正相关关系并没有延伸到最高 PDI 四分位数。我们发现 DTD 和妄想倾向在我们的非临床样本中呈正相关,这是出乎意料的。

局限性

结果需要在临床样本中进行复制。

结论

考虑到 JTC 偏差与临床妄想之间的既定关联,目前的发现可能反映了非临床和具有临床意义的妄想群体之间的关系不同,或者在某种程度上反转了妄想倾向的迹象。

相似文献

1
Jumping to conclusions in the less-delusion-prone? Preliminary evidence from a more reliable beads task.在较少妄想倾向的人中,仓促下结论的情况更少?更可靠的珠子任务的初步证据。
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2020 Sep;68:101562. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2020.101562. Epub 2020 Feb 19.
2
Jumping to conclusions in the less-delusion-prone? Further evidence from a more reliable beads task.在较少妄想倾向的人中是否更容易仓促下结论?来自更可靠珠子任务的进一步证据。
Conscious Cogn. 2020 Aug;83:102956. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2020.102956. Epub 2020 Jun 2.
3
Jumping to conclusions style along the continuum of delusions: delusion-prone individuals are not hastier in decision making than healthy individuals.沿着妄想连续体的草率下结论方式:易产生妄想的个体在决策时并不比健康个体更草率。
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 20;10(3):e0121347. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121347. eCollection 2015.
4
Beads task vs. box task: The specificity of the jumping to conclusions bias.珠子任务与盒子任务:草率下结论偏差的特异性
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2017 Sep;56:42-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2016.07.017. Epub 2016 Aug 15.
5
Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering.对珠子任务草率下结论?关于妄想观念和数据收集的元分析
Schizophr Bull. 2015 Sep;41(5):1183-91. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbu187. Epub 2015 Jan 22.
6
The role of metacognitive beliefs in the proneness to hallucinations and delusions: an analysis across clinical and non-clinical populations.元认知信念在幻觉和妄想倾向中的作用:对临床和非临床人群的分析。
Br J Clin Psychol. 2013 Sep;52(3):330-46. doi: 10.1111/bjc.12020. Epub 2013 May 25.
7
Jumping to delusions in early psychosis.早期精神病中的妄想跳跃现象。
Cogn Neuropsychiatry. 2014;19(3):241-56. doi: 10.1080/13546805.2013.854198. Epub 2013 Nov 11.
8
Delusion proneness and 'jumping to conclusions': relative and absolute effects.妄想倾向与“急于下结论”:相对效应和绝对效应
Psychol Med. 2015 Apr;45(6):1253-62. doi: 10.1017/S0033291714002359. Epub 2014 Oct 2.
9
A comparison of cognitive biases between schizophrenia patients with delusions and healthy individuals with delusion-like experiences.妄想型精神分裂症患者与有类似妄想体验的健康个体认知偏差的比较。
Eur Psychiatry. 2015 Nov;30(8):943-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2015.08.003. Epub 2015 Oct 13.
10
Jumping to Conclusions and Its Associations With Psychotic Experiences in Preadolescent Children at Familial High Risk of Schizophrenia or Bipolar Disorder-The Danish High Risk and Resilience Study, VIA 11.早发性精神分裂症或双相情感障碍家族高危儿童的跳跃结论及其与精神病体验的关联——丹麦高危和复原力研究,VIA11。
Schizophr Bull. 2022 Nov 18;48(6):1363-1372. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbac060.

引用本文的文献

1
Associations of conservatism and jumping to conclusions biases with aberrant salience and default mode network.保守主义和妄下结论偏差与异常突显和默认模式网络的关联。
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2024 May;78(5):322-331. doi: 10.1111/pcn.13652. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
2
Towards a neurocomputational account of social controllability: From models to mental health.迈向社会可控性的神经计算解释:从模型到心理健康。
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2023 May;148:105139. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105139. Epub 2023 Mar 20.
3
Computational mechanisms underlying illusion of control in delusional individuals.
妄想症患者控制错觉背后的计算机制。
Schizophr Res. 2022 Jul;245:50-58. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2022.01.054. Epub 2022 Feb 15.
4
Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs in the German-speaking general population: endorsement rates and links to reasoning biases and paranoia.德语区普通人群中的新冠病毒阴谋论信念:认同率及其与推理偏差和偏执狂的关联
Psychol Med. 2021 Mar 16:1-15. doi: 10.1017/S0033291721001124.
5
Rethinking delusions: A selective review of delusion research through a computational lens.重新思考妄想:通过计算视角对妄想研究的选择性回顾。
Schizophr Res. 2022 Jul;245:23-41. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2021.01.023. Epub 2021 Mar 3.