How Do Delusion-Prone Individuals Respond to Disconfirmatory Evidence?
Improving Comprehension of the Beads Task May Help
Abstract
Abstract. Research employing the beads task suggests that people with delusional tendencies over-adjust to disconfirmatory evidence compared to low-delusion-prone individuals. This interpretation is in tension with studies using the bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE) task, which provide evidence that people with delusional tendencies are less receptive to disconfirmatory evidence. It has been suggested that over-adjustment on the beads task may be driven by miscomprehension of the task. The current preliminary study aimed to minimize miscomprehension on the beads task and determine how high-delusion-prone people respond to disconfirmatory evidence on both tasks. Fifty-one undergraduate participants completed the BADE task and an adapted version of the beads task. We expected that corrective feedback on the beads task would reduce miscomprehension, and that high-delusion-prone participants would be less receptive to disconfirmatory evidence on both tasks. Our results suggest this version of the beads task improved rates of comprehension relative to previous research. However, we found no evidence that the high-delusion-prone group demonstrated elevated over-adjustment or belief inflexibility in either task. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.
References
2012). Over-adjustment or miscomprehension? A re-examination of the jumping to conclusions bias. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 46, 532–540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867411435291
(2007). A cognitive bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE) is associated with schizotypy. Schizophrenia Research, 90, 334–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2006.11.012
(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2007). Hopping, skipping or jumping to conclusions? Clarifying the role of the JTC bias in delusions. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 12, 46–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546800600750597
(2015).
(A psychological model of delusional belief: Integrating reasoning biases with perceptual, self-concept and emotional factors . In N. D. GalbraithEd., Aberrant beliefs and reasoning (pp. 7–33). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.1991). Reasoning in deluded schizophrenic and paranoid patients. Biases in performance on a probabilistic inference task. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 179, 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053-199104000-00003
(1988). Probabilistic judgements in deluded and non-deluded subjects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 40, 801–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748808402300
(2011). A quantitative meta-analysis of population based studies of premorbid intelligence and schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 132, 220–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2011.06.017
(2017). Association of the jumping to conclusions and evidence integration biases with delusions in psychosis: A detailed meta-analytic approach. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 43, 344–354. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbw056
(2018). Towards a reliable repeated-measures beads task. Manuscript submitted for publication.
(2013). The role of cognitive biases and personality variables in subclinical delusional ideation. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 18, 208–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546805.2012.692873
(2005). Jumping to conclusions in delusional and non-delusional schizophrenic patients. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44(Pt 2), 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466505X35678
(2004). Measuring delusional ideation: The 21-item Peters et al. Delusions Inventory (PDI). Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30, 1005–1022. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a007116
(2015). Jumping to conclusions about the beads task? A meta-analysis of delusional ideation and data-gathering. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 41, 1183–1191. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbu187
(2014). Impaired integration of disambiguating evidence in delusional schizophrenia patients. Psychological Medicine, 44, 2729–2738. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291714000397
(2015). Delusion proneness and “jumping to conclusions”: relative and absolute effects. Psychological Medicine, 45, 1253–1262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291714002359
(2007). Jumping to conclusions and the continuum of delusional beliefs. Behavior Research and Therapy, 45, 1255–1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2006.09.002
(2001). Wechsler test for adult reading. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
(2007). A bias against disconfirmatory evidence is associated with delusion proneness in a nonclinical sample. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 33, 1023–1028. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbm013
(2012). Cognitive factors associated with subclinical delusional ideation in the general population. Psychiatry Research, 197, 345–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2012.01.004
(