Background: Given the evidence that reasoning biases contribute to delusional persistence and change, several research groups have made systematic efforts to modify them. The current experiment tested the hypothesis that targeting reasoning biases would result in change in delusions. Methods: One hundred and one participants with current delusions and schizophrenia spectrum psychosis were randomly allocated to a brief computerized reasoning training intervention or to a control condition involving computer-based activities of similar duration. The primary hypotheses tested were that the reasoning training intervention, would improve (1) data gathering and belief flexibility and (2) delusional thinking, specifically paranoia. We then tested whether the changes in paranoia were mediated by changes in data gathering and flexibility, and whether working memory and negative symptoms moderated any intervention effects. Results: On an intention-to-treat analysis, there were significant improvements in state paranoia and reasoning in the experimental compared with the control condition. There was evidence that changes in reasoning mediated changes in paranoia, although this effect fell just outside the conventional level of significance after adjustment for baseline confounders. Working memory and negative symptoms significantly moderated the effects of the intervention on reasoning. Conclusion: The study demonstrated the effectiveness of a brief reasoning intervention in improving both reasoning processes and paranoia. It thereby provides proof-of-concept evidence that reasoning is a promising intermediary target in interventions to ameliorate delusions, and thus supports the value of developing this approach as a longer therapeutic intervention.
Delusions are often resistant to change, persisting despite successful antipsychotic treatment or Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. This study aimed to target reasoning processes, particularly the ‘Jumping to Conclusions’ (JTC) bias and belief flexibility, which are thought to play a part in maintaining delusional conviction.13 participants with a diagnosis of psychosis and high levels of conviction in their delusions completed a one-off computerised training package, lasting approximately 1.5 h. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, pre-intervention (two weeks later), post-intervention (immediately after completing the training) and at 1 month follow-up.The package was well received by participants. There were improvements in JTC, belief flexibility and delusional conviction between pre- and post-intervention measures. Controlled studies powered to detect changes in key outcomes are warranted in order to evaluate the efficacy of the programme.
Background:For many patients with persecutory delusions, leaving home and going into crowded streets is a key clinical problem. In this study we aimed to inform treatment development by determining the psychological mechanisms whereby busy urban environments increase paranoia. In a randomized design with prespecified mediation analysis, we compared the effects on patients of going outside into a busy social environment with staying inside. Methods:Fifty-nine patients with current persecutory delusions, in the context of nonaffective psychosis, reporting fears when going outside were assessed on factors from a cognitive model of paranoia. They were then randomized either to enter a busy local shopping street or to complete a neutral task indoors. They were then reassessed on the measures. Results:Compared with staying inside, the street exposure condition resulted in significant increases in paranoia, voices, anxiety, negative beliefs about the self, and negative beliefs about others. There was also a decrease in positive thoughts about the self. There was no alteration in reasoning processes. There were indications that the increase in paranoia was partially mediated by increases in anxiety (45%), depression (38%), and negative beliefs about others (45%). Conclusions:We found that increases in negative affect may form an important route by which social exposure in urban environments triggers paranoid thoughts. The study provides an illustration of how an experimental approach can be applied to help understand a specific difficulty for patients with psychosis. In future studies the effects of specific elements of the social environment could be tested.
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.
Collaborative working between health professionals, school teachers and families has resulted in an age-appropriate curriculum, which employs validated educational techniques. This will be refined following pilot courses before formal evaluation in a multicentre randomized controlled trial.
Background and objectivesDelusional beliefs with persecutory content are common in psychosis, but difficult to treat. Interventions targeting hypothesised causal and maintaining factors have been proposed as a way of improving therapy. The current study is a feasibility randomised controlled trial of the ‘Thinking Well (TW)’ intervention: This novel approach combines the recently developed Maudsley Review Training Programme (MRTP), with additional, focussed cognitive-behavioural therapy sessions.Methods31 participants with distressing persecutory delusions and schizophrenia spectrum disorders were randomised to TW or to treatment as usual in a 2:1 ratio. Participants completed outcome assessments at 0 (baseline), 1 (post-MRTP), 6 (post-TW) and 8 (follow-up) weeks. Key outcomes included belief flexibility, paranoia, and delusional conviction and distress. Participants allocated to TW completed the MRTP package and four CBT sessions with a clinical psychologist.ResultsRecruitment proved feasible. Participants reported the intervention was relevant and had resulted in positive changes in thinking and mood, which they could use in everyday life. Treatment effects were moderate-large for key outcomes including belief flexibility, paranoia conviction and distress. The additional TW sessions appeared to confer benefits over MRTP alone.LimitationsAssessments were not carried out blind to treatment condition. Recruitment was opportunistic, from an identified pool of research participants. Finally, a few participants had already completed the MRTP as part of a previous study.ConclusionsThe TW intervention appears to be feasible and acceptable to participants, and the effects of treatment are promising. A fully powered randomised controlled trial of the intervention is warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.