Dataset Information

Is intuition allied with jumping to conclusions in decision-making? An intensive longitudinal study in patients with delusions and in non-clinical individuals.

ABSTRACT: Research suggests that a jumping-to-conclusions (JTC) bias, excessive intuition, and reduced analysis in information processing may favor suboptimal decision-making, both in non-clinical and mentally disordered individuals. The temporal relationship between processing modes and JTC bias, however, remains unexplored. Therefore, using an experience sampling methodology (ESM) approach, this study examines the temporal associations between intuitive/analytical information processing, JTC bias, and delusions in non-clinical individuals and patients with schizophrenia. Specifically, we examine whether a high use of intuitive and/or a low use of analytical processing predicts subsequent JTC bias and paranoid conviction. In a smartphone-based ESM study, participants will be prompted four times per day over three consecutive days to answer questionnaires designed to measure JTC bias, paranoid conviction, and preceding everyday-life intuition/analysis. Our hierarchical data will be analyzed using multilevel modelling for hypothesis testing. Results will further elucidate the role of aberrant human reasoning, particularly intuition, in (non-)clinical delusions and delusion-like experiences, and also inform general information processing models.

SUBMITTER: Zander-Schellenberg T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8687575 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is intuition allied with jumping to conclusions in decision-making? An intensive longitudinal study in patients with delusions and in non-clinical individuals.

Zander-Schellenberg Thea T Kuhn Sarah A K SAK Möller Julian J Meyer Andrea H AH Huber Christian C Lieb Roselind R Andreou Christina C

PloS one 20211220 12

Research suggests that a jumping-to-conclusions (JTC) bias, excessive intuition, and reduced analysis in information processing may favor suboptimal decision-making, both in non-clinical and mentally disordered individuals. The temporal relationship between processing modes and JTC bias, however, remains unexplored. Therefore, using an experience sampling methodology (ESM) approach, this study examines the temporal associations between intuitive/analytical information processing, JTC bias, and d ...[more]

PMID: 34928987

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundJumping-to-conclusions (JTC) is a prominent reasoning bias in schizophrenia (SCZ). While it has been linked to not only psychopathological abnormalities (delusions and impulsive decision-making) but also unstable belief formation, its origin remains unclear. We here directly test to which extend JTC is associated with delusional ideation, impulsive decision-making, and unstable belief formation.MethodsIn total, 45 SCZ patients were compared with matched samples of 45 patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and 45 healthy controls (HC) as delusions and JTC also occur in other mental disorders and the general population. Participants performed a probabilistic beads task. To test the association of JTC with measures of delusions (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS]positive, PANSSpositive-factor, and Peter Delusions Inventory [PDI]), Bayesian linear regressions were computed. For the link between JTC and impulsive decision-making and unstable beliefs, we conducted between-group comparisons of "draws to decision" (DTD), "decision times" (DT), and "disconfirmatory evidence scores" (DES).ResultsBayesian regression obtained no robust relationship between PDI and DTD (all |R2adj| ≤ .057, all P ≥ .022, all Bayes Factors [BF01] ≤ 0.046; α adj = .00833). Compared with MDD and HC, patients with SCZ needed more time to decide (significantly higher DT in ambiguous trials: all P ≤ .005, r2 ≥ .216; numerically higher DT in other trials). Further, SCZ had unstable beliefs about the correct source jar whenever unexpected changes in bead sequences (disconfirmatory evidence) occurred (compared with MDD: all P ≤ .004 and all r2 ≥ .232; compared with HC: numerically higher DES). No significant correlation was observed between DT and DTD (all P ≥ .050).ConclusionsOur findings point toward a relationship of JTC with unstable belief formation and do not support the assumption that JTC is associated with impulsive decision-making.

Project description:ObjectivesCognitive and other biases can influence the quality of healthcare decision making. While substantial research has explored how biases can lead to diagnostic or other errors in medicine, fewer studies have examined how they impact the decision making of other healthcare professionals. This scoping review aimed to identify and synthesise a broad range of research investigating whether decisions made by allied health professionals are influenced by cognitive, affective or other biases.Materials and methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in five electronic databases. Title, abstract and full text screening was undertaken in duplicate, using prespecified eligibility criteria designed to identify studies attempting to demonstrate the presence of bias when allied healthcare professionals make decisions. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, focussing on the type of allied health profession, type of decision, and type of bias reported within the included studies.ResultsThe search strategy identified 149 studies. Of these, 119 studies came from the field of psychology, with substantially fewer from social work, physical and occupational therapy, speech pathology, audiology and genetic counselling. Diagnostic and assessment decisions were the most common decision types, with fewer studies assessing treatment, prognostic or other clinical decisions. Studies investigated the presence of over 30 cognitive, affective and other decision making biases, including stereotyping biases, anchoring, and confirmation bias. Overall, 77% of the studies reported at least one outcome that represented the presence of a bias.ConclusionThis scoping review provides an overview of studies investigating whether decisions made by allied health professionals are influenced by cognitive, affective or other biases. Biases have the potential to seriously impact the quality, consistency and accuracy of decision making in allied health practice. The findings highlight a need for further research particularly in professional disciplines outside of psychology, using methods that reflect real life healthcare decision making.

Dataset Information

Is intuition allied with jumping to conclusions in decision-making? An intensive longitudinal study in patients with delusions and in non-clinical individuals.

Publications

Is intuition allied with jumping to conclusions in decision-making? An intensive longitudinal study in patients with delusions and in non-clinical individuals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets