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; ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Conscious Cogn. 2020 Aug;83:102956. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2020.102956. Epub 2020 Jun 2.
A single meta-analysis has found that healthy people with higher delusion-proneness tend to gather less information (i.e., make fewer draws to decision, or DTD) on the beads task, although the findings of contributing studies were mixed, and the pooled effect size was small. However, using a new and more reliable "distractor sequences" beads task, we recently found a positive relationship between delusion-proneness and DTD in a healthy sample. In the current study, we re-tested this relationship in a new sample, and tested the possibility that the relationship is driven by participant's ability to understand and use odds or likelihood information ("odds literacy").
Healthy participants (N = 167) completed the distractor sequences beads task, the Peters Delusions Inventory (PDI) which measures delusion-proneness, a measure of odds literacy, and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress scale.
PDI and DTD were positively correlated, and comparing PDI quartiles on DTD confirmed a statistically significant trend of increasing DTD with PDI quartile. Odds literacy was positively rather than negatively associated with both DTD and PDI. Anxiety was positively correlated with PDI and DTD.
We replicated our earlier finding that DTD and delusion-proneness were positively related in a non-clinical sample, but found that increased odds-literacy did not drive lower PDI and DTD, and hence did not explain their covariance. It is possible however that anxiety and co-occurring risk aversion drive increased delusion-proneness and information-gathering, potentially accounting for the positive relationship between PDI and DTD.
一项单一的荟萃分析发现，具有较高妄想倾向的健康人在珠子任务上收集的信息较少（即，决策时抽取的珠子较少，或 DTD），尽管相关研究的结果存在差异，且汇总的效应量较小。然而，使用一种新的、更可靠的“干扰序列”珠子任务，我们最近在一个健康样本中发现了妄想倾向与 DTD 之间的正相关关系。在当前的研究中，我们在一个新的样本中重新测试了这种关系，并测试了这种关系是否由参与者理解和使用赔率或可能性信息的能力（“赔率读写能力”）驱动的可能性。
健康参与者（N=167）完成了干扰序列珠子任务、彼得斯妄想量表（PDI），该量表用于测量妄想倾向、赔率读写能力量表，以及抑郁、焦虑和压力量表。
PDI 和 DTD 呈正相关，在 DTD 上比较 PDI 四分位数证实了随着 PDI 四分位数的增加，DTD 呈统计学显著增加的趋势。赔率读写能力与 DTD 和 PDI 均呈正相关，而不是负相关。焦虑与 PDI 和 DTD 呈正相关。
我们复制了我们早期的发现，即在非临床样本中 DTD 和妄想倾向呈正相关，但发现增加的赔率读写能力并没有降低 PDI 和 DTD，因此不能解释它们的协方差。然而，焦虑和同时存在的风险厌恶可能会导致妄想倾向和信息收集增加，从而解释 PDI 和 DTD 之间的正相关关系。
