Jumping To Conclusions Bias Research Articles

Metacognitive training for delusions (MCTd): effectiveness on data-gathering and belief flexibility in a Chinese sample.

Metacognitive training (MCT) was developed to promote awareness of reasoning biases among patients with schizophrenia. While MCT has been translated into 31 languages, most MCT studies were conducted in Europe, including newer evidence recommending an individualized approach of delivery. As reasoning biases covered in MCT are separable processes and are associated with different symptoms, testing the effect of selected MCT modules would help to develop a targeted and cost-effective intervention for specific symptoms and associated mechanisms. This study tested the efficacy of a four-session metacognitive training for delusions, MCTd (in Traditional Chinese with cultural adaptations, provided individually), as an adjunct to antipsychotics in reducing severity and conviction of delusions, jumping to conclusions (JTC) bias and belief inflexibility. Forty-four patients with delusions were randomized into the MCTd or the wait-list control condition. Patients on wait-list received the same MCTd after 4 weeks of treatment as usual (TAU). Assessment interviews took place before and after the treatment, and at 4-week follow-up. There was an additional baseline assessment for the controls. JTC and belief flexibility were measured by the beads tasks and the Maudsley Assessment of Delusions Scale. Attendance rate of the MCTd was satisfactory (84.5%). Compared to TAU, there was a greater reduction in psychotic symptoms, delusional severity and conviction following MCTd. There was a large treatment effect size in improvement in belief flexibility. Improvement in reaction to hypothetical contradiction predicted treatment effect in positive symptoms and delusions. JTC bias was reduced following MCTd, although the treatment effect was not significantly larger than TAU. Our results support the use of process-based interventions that target psychological mechanisms underlying specific psychotic symptoms as adjuncts to more conventional approaches.

The Beads, the Fish and the Box: Interrelationship Between “jumping to Conclusions” Tasks and Their Links with Cognitive Abilities

Jumping to conclusions (JTC) is a reasoning bias where individuals make hasty decisions based on insufficient data. It is commonly observed among patients with delusions and is a risk factor for developing delusions. Several task paradigms have been developed to test JTC, but their convergence in measuring JTC remains unexplored. This is a pilot test to examine the consistencies between three JTC tasks with a student sample. The relationships between JTC and cognitive abilities were also explored. Forty-six university students completed the Beads Task, Fish Task and Box Task, as well as assessment of memory, intellectual functioning, executive function, impulsivity and need for closure. There was a moderate correlation between the beads task and fish task on various measures of JTC (draws to decision [DTD], r =.50, p <.01; confidence, r =.47, p <.01; dichotomous JTC bias, × 2 =16.14, p <.001). There was a mild correlation between DTD on the fish task and box task ( r =.30, p <.05). General intelligence was associated with DTD and JTC bias (but not confidence) on the beads and fish tasks. Confidence in decision was associated with a higher level of impulsivity and a lower level of set-shifting ability. Despite differences in materials and design of the three probability-based tasks, results of JTC measured by the beads task and box task were individually consistent with the fish task, and were not correlated between the two. The data-gathering process and the confidence in decision are associated with different cognitive abilities. Further study including a clinical sample is needed.

Prefrontal activity measured by functional near infrared spectroscopy during probabilistic inference in subjects with persecutory delusions

Jumping to conclusions (JTC) is a probabilistic reasoning bias and is thought to contribute to delusion formation. Neurobiological correlates of the JTC bias are not known. We aimed to examine the rostral prefrontal cortex (rPFC) activity with functional near ınfrared spectroscopy during a modified version of the Beads in a Jar Task (BIJT) in subjects with persecutory delusions (N=25). In BIJT participants are presented beads either drawn from one of the two jars with opposite probability ratios (PRs) of colored beads and are required to decide from which jar beads are being drawn. We administered the BIJT with 90/10 and 55/45 PRs. Compared to healthy controls (N=20), patients reached a decision earlier in both conditions. While the medial rPFC regions were more active in the 90/10 condition in controls compared to patients, lateral rPFC activation was higher in the 55/45 condition in patients than controls. Only in the control group, there was a marked decline in the lateral rPFC activation in the 55/45 condition compared to the 90/10 condition. The activity in the lateral rPFC was negatively correlated with the amount of beads drawn in healthy controls but not in subjects with persecutory delusions. Our results suggest that during the BIJT, rPFC does not function as a single unit and rather consists of functional subunits that are organized differently in patients and controls. The failure to deactivate the lateral rPFC may be associated with earlier decisions in subjects with persecutory delusions.

Neuropsychological functioning and jumping to conclusions in delusions

BackgroundIt has been consistently demonstrated that delusions are related to jumping to conclusions (JTC), a data-gathering bias and potential candidate endophenotype of psychosis. Recent research suggests that JTC may be a marker of treatment response. However, we know little about the factors contributing to the occurrence of this reasoning bias. This study investigated the relationship between JTC and hypothesised deficits in working memory, employing standard well-validated neuropsychological tests, in people with current delusions. MethodOne hundred and twenty six people with schizophrenia spectrum psychosis and current delusions were assessed for current symptoms, and tested for JTC. We compared performance on tests of working memory in those with the reasoning bias and those without. ResultsAs expected, 30–40% of this sample of people with current delusions showed the JTC bias. There were no differences in premorbid IQ between those with and without the JTC reasoning bias. However, the performance of the JTC group was significantly worse on tests of working memory. ConclusionsThe JTC data-gathering bias is associated with impairments in working memory. New non-pharmacological interventions for people with delusions, designed to improve data gathering, may benefit from incorporating strategies to overcome deficits in working memory.

Dopaminergic Modulation of Probabilistic Reasoning and Overconfidence in Errors: A Double-Blind Study

Reasoning biases such as jumping to conclusions (JTC) and overconfidence in errors have been well replicated in patients with delusions. However, their relation to dopaminergic activity, central to pathophysiologic models of psychosis, has not yet been investigated. This study aimed to examine the effects of a dopaminergic agonist (L-dopa) and a dopaminergic antagonist (haloperidol) on the JTC bias and overconfidence in errors after single-dose administration in healthy individuals. The study used a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-way crossover design. Participants were 36 healthy individuals aged 18-36 years. The variables of interest were draws to decision and probability threshold to decision on a computerized variant of the beads task and the number of high-confident incorrect responses on a visual memory task. There were no significant effects of substance on draws to decision and probability threshold to decision. A significant effect emerged for high-confident incorrect responses in the memory task; pairwise comparisons indicated a significant reduction of the number of high-confident incorrect responses after administration of haloperidol vs l-dopa and placebo. This is the first study to investigate the direct effects of dopaminergic drugs on reasoning biases. The JTC bias and overconfidence in errors showed a differential pattern of dopaminergic modulation, suggesting that they represent different facets of reasoning abnormalities that interact with each other to produce delusions in susceptible individuals.

Delusion‐proneness or miscomprehension? A re‐examination of the jumping‐to‐conclusions bias

Previous research has consistently shown that individuals with delusions typically exhibit a jumping‐to‐conclusions (JTC) bias when administrated the probabilistic reasoning ‘beads task’ (i.e., decisions made on limited evidence and/or decisions over‐adjusted in light of disconfirming evidence). However, recent work in this area has indicated that a lack of comprehension of the task may be confounding this finding. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the influence of task administration, delusion‐proneness, and miscomprehension on the elucidation of the JTC bias. A total of 92 undergraduate university students were divided into one of two task conditions (i.e., non‐computerised and computerised) and were further identified as either delusion‐prone or non‐delusion‐prone and as comprehending or non‐comprehending the task. Overall, 25% of the sample demonstrated a JTC bias, and just over half made illogical responses consistent with a failure to comprehend the task. Qualitative evidence of comprehension revealed that these ‘illogical responses’ were being driven by a misunderstanding of task instructions. The way the task was administrated and levels of delusion‐proneness did not significantly influence JTC. However, miscomprehending participants were significantly more likely to exhibit the bias than those who did comprehend. These results suggest that miscomprehension rather than delusion‐proneness may be driving the JTC bias, and that future research should include measures of miscomprehension.

Jumping to conclusions, a lack of belief flexibility and delusional conviction in psychosis: A longitudinal investigation of the structure, frequency, and relatedness of reasoning biases.

Two reasoning biases, jumping to conclusions (JTC) and belief inflexibility, have been found to be associated with delusions. We examined these biases and their relationship with delusional conviction in a longitudinal cohort of people with schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis. We hypothesized that JTC, lack of belief flexibility, and delusional conviction would form distinct factors, and that JTC and lack of belief flexibility would predict less change in delusional conviction over time. Two hundred seventy-three patients with delusions were assessed over twelve months of a treatment trial (Garety et al., 2008). Forty-one percent of the sample had 100% conviction in their delusions, 50% showed a JTC bias, and 50%–75% showed a lack of belief flexibility. Delusional conviction, JTC, and belief flexibility formed distinct factors although conviction was negatively correlated with belief flexibility. Conviction declined slightly over the year in this established psychosis group, whereas the reasoning biases were stable. There was little evidence that reasoning predicted the slight decline in conviction. The degree to which people believe their delusions, their ability to think that they may be mistaken and to consider alternative explanations, and their hastiness in decision making are three distinct processes although belief flexibility and conviction are related. In this established psychosis sample, reasoning biases changed little in response to medication or psychological therapy. Required now is examination of these processes in psychosis groups where there is greater change in delusion conviction, as well as tests of the effects on delusions when these reasoning biases are specifically targeted.

Specificity of jumping to conclusions and attributional biases: A comparison between patients with schizophrenia, depression, and anorexia nervosa

Introduction. The knowledge of the specificity of cognitive biases in psychiatric disorders is important in order to develop disorder-specific cognitive models and therapies. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the specificity of jumping to conclusions (JTC) and attributional biases (AB) for patients with schizophrenia. Methods. Twenty patients with paranoid schizophrenia were compared with patients with depression (n=20) and with anorexia nervosa (n=15) and nonclinical controls (n=55). All participants were administered a modified version of the beads task (JTC), a revised German version of the Internal, Personal, and Situational Attributions Questionnaire (AB), and several symptom and neurocognitive measures. Results. The proportion of patients with JTC bias in the schizophrenia group was, at the descriptive level, higher than in the depression and the anorexia groups. Regarding AB, the schizophrenia group showed a significantly stronger externalising but not personalising bias than the clinical control groups. Neither JTC nor attributional biases were significantly associated with delusions in general or persecutory delusion. Conclusions. We found evidence for the specificity of an externalising bias for paranoid schizophrenia. Concerning JTC bias the evidence was less clear. Whether the modification of those biases through psychological interventions would have an effect on psychopathology should be investigated in the context of clinical trials.

Over-adjustment or miscomprehension? A re-examination of the jumping to conclusions bias

Previous research has consistently shown that individuals with delusions typically exhibit a jumping to conclusions (JTC) bias when administered the probabilistic reasoning 'beads task' (i.e. decisions made with limited evidence or 'premature decisions' and decisions over-adjusted in light of disconfirming evidence or 'over-adjustment'). More recent work, however, also suggests that these effects may also be influenced by miscomprehension of the task. The current paper is an investigation into the contributing effects of miscomprehension on the JTC bias. A total of 75 participants (25 diagnosed with schizophrenia with a history of delusions; 25 non-clinical delusion-prone; 25 non-delusion-prone controls) completed two identical versions of the beads task, distinct only by the inclusion of an extra instructional set designed to increase comprehension. Qualitative data confirmed that miscomprehension is a valid construct, and the results showed that the addition of an instructional set to the second version of the task led to greater comprehension and a statistically significant drop in 'over-adjustment'. Nevertheless, both tasks showed that 'premature decisions' were significantly more prevalent in the schizophrenia group and were unaffected by the intervention. It was concluded that the 'premature decisions' component of the JTC bias remains a feature of decision-making in schizophrenia, but that previously reported 'over-adjustment' effects are likely to be influenced by miscomprehension of the beads task instructional set. These findings are discussed in light of the recently proposed 'hypersalience of evidence-hypothesis matches' account of the JTC bias.

Jumping to conclusions is associated with paranoia but not general suspiciousness: a comparison of two versions of the probabilistic reasoning paradigm.

Theoretical models ascribe jumping to conclusions (JTCs) a prominent role in the pathogenesis of paranoia. While many earlier studies corroborated this account, some newer investigations have found no or only small associations of the JTC bias with paranoid symptoms. The present study examined whether these inconsistencies in part reflect methodological differences across studies. The study was built upon the psychometric high-risk paradigm. A total of 1899 subjects from the general population took part in an online survey and were administered the Paranoia Checklist as well as one of two different variants of the probabilistic reasoning task: one variant with a traditional instruction (a) and one novel variant that combines probability estimates with decision judgments (b). Factor analysis of the Paranoia Checklist yielded an unspecific suspiciousness factor and a psychotic paranoia factor. The latter was significantly associated with scores indicating hasty decision making. Subjects scoring two standard deviations above the mean of the Paranoia Checklist showed an abnormal data-gathering style relative to subjects with normal scores. Findings suggest that the so-called decision threshold parameter is more sensitive than the conventional JTC index. For future research the specific contents of paranoid beliefs deserve more consideration in the investigation of decision making in schizophrenia as JTC seems to be associated with core psychosis-prone features of paranoia only.

Jumping to conclusions: the psychology of delusional reasoning

SummaryDelusions are a key symptom of psychosis and they are frequently distressing and disabling. Existing treatments, both pharmacological and psychological, are only partially effective. It is important to develop new treatment approaches based on theoretically derived and empirically tested processes. Delusions are associated with a reasoning bias: the jumping to conclusions (JTC) bias involves gathering limited information to reach decisions. It is proposed that this bias influences appraisals of psychotic experiences leading to the formation and persistence of delusions. Existing treatments do not influence JTC. A new intensive treatment approach – ‘reasoning training’ – is described. It aims to encourage participants to gather information, consider alternative explanations for events and review the evidence before reaching a decision. Preliminary data suggest that it is possible to change the JTC bias and that this improves belief flexibility and may reduce delusional conviction. The concepts and methods of this new approach have implications for clinical practice.

Jumping to conclusions and perceptions in early psychosis: Relationship with delusional beliefs

Introduction. Previous research has suggested that biases in cognitive processes involved in everyday reasoning may contribute to the development of delusional beliefs. The aim of this study was to explore jumping to conclusions (JTC), a data-gathering bias, and jumping to perceptions (JTP), a bias towards believing ambiguous perceptual events are real and external. Methods. Individuals with current delusions (n=17), remitted delusions (n=17), both recruited from an early psychosis service, and nonclinical participants (n=35) were compared on a probabilistic reasoning task, an auditory perceptual bias task, and the Barely Visible Words task. Results. The deluded participants did not demonstrate the expected JTC bias; therefore the relationship between JTC and JTP could not be examined. However, both clinical groups exhibited a JTP bias on the auditory perceptual bias task. In contrast, the lowered perceptual threshold for threat displayed by the control group was absent in the clinical groups. Conclusions. These results suggest that the JTP bias may be a trait characteristic in those with a propensity to delusions, and that these individuals may also show a bias away from threat.

Failing to ponder? delusion‐prone individuals rush to conclusions

Jumping to conclusions (JTC) has been proposed as an aetiological factor involved in the formation of delusions from the earliest stages. A number of researchers have thus shifted their focus to include the study of subclinical populations. Expanding on these studies, 17 delusion-prone and 22 control students completed four versions of the beads-in-a-jar paradigm (including multiple jar variants) to test recent claims regarding JTC's specificity to less ambiguous paradigms with a limited number of jars. Additional measures were administered to tease out a potential mechanism underlying JTC. The delusion-prone group showed a higher JTC bias which proved relatively robust across variants. Task performance was related to degree of self-reported rushing. It is concluded that delusion-prone individuals exhibit JTC, even when confronted with more ambiguous scenarios, potentially as a consequence of feeling rushed.

Jumping to conclusions in delusional and non‐delusional schizophrenic patients

Several studies have provided evidence for the claim that a subgroup of (schizophrenic) patients with current delusions share a jumping to conclusions (JTC) bias. The primary aim of the present study was to investigate whether currently deluded and non-deluded schizophrenic patients perform differently on three tasks tapping probabilistic reasoning. Probabilistic reasoning was assessed in 31 schizophrenic patients, 28 psychiatric controls, and 17 healthy controls. In addition to the traditional draws to decision procedure, we employed two tasks for which participants had to judge, at each stage, the likelihood that beads come from either container (graded estimates procedure). Reaction times were recorded for the graded estimates procedure. A JTC bias was displayed by 42% of the schizophrenic patients in the draws to decision condition, while 7% of the psychiatric patients and none of the healthy controls reached a decision after only one bead. A similar pattern of results was observed for the graded estimates procedure. This bias was more pronounced in deluded schizophrenic patients, although currently non-deluded patients also showed evidence for earlier decisions. A bias to over-adjust when confronted with potentially disconfirmatory evidence was confined to deluded schizophrenic participants. There was also evidence for an increase in JTC in the deluded group over the course of the tasks. No substantial group differences occurred with respect to reaction time parameters indicating that results are not attributable to impulsivity. The findings provide further evidence for state and trait characteristics of abnormal reasoning in paranoid schizophrenia. Results are discussed in light of several competing explanations for JTC in schizophrenia.