On the relationship between subjective decision criteria and paranoid ideations.

Abstract

Following the conjecture made by (Bliznashki and Hristova in Appetite 167:105645, 2021), we test the hypothesis that liberal subjective decision criteria exhibited during a task involving discrimination between random and systematically correlated patterns should be associated with elevated levels of paranoid ideations. Study 1 establishes the proposed association in the presence of several control measures while also demonstrating that the relationship in question is significantly moderated by subjects' working memory spans and tendencies to be overconfident in their judgments. Study 2 provides further evidence that these effects are indeed specific to tasks involving discrimination between random and systematic patterns and that the observed results are not due to some form of (anti) acquiescence bias or other general trends. Certain specifics of the correlation matrices involving cognitive measures significantly related to the paranoia continuum suggest that our results are consistent with the Entropic Brain Hypothesis. Finally, a simulation study employing a Neural Network demonstrates that increased entropy and liberal decision criteria might be connected to each other with said connection being amenable to an interpretation within the Bayesian paradigm.