‘Jumping to conclusions’ in first-episode psychosis

Dudley, Robert; Shaftoe, Debra; Cavanagh, Kate; Spencer, Helen; Ormrod, John; Turkington, Douglas; Freeston, Mark H.

doi:10.1111/j.1751-7893.2010.00258.x

Cited by 45 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Both nonclinical and clinical participants with delusions adjust their answers accordingly when presented with a more difficult task, requesting more pieces of evidence before reaching a decision (Dudley et al, 1997b(Dudley et al, , 2011White and Mansell, 2009). This indicates that the JTC bias is a data-gathering bias rather than impulsivity.…”

Section: The Specificity Of the Jtc Bias: Emotional Saliency And Diffmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Not all individuals with delusions demonstrate the JTC bias, and the bias is also present in nonpsychiatric populations. Approximately 40% of individuals diagnosed with first-episode psychosis (FEP; Dudley et al, 2011) and 20% of a nonclinical population demonstrated the JTC bias .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…T he jumping-to-conclusions (JTC) bias refers to a tendency to gather less evidence before reaching a decision (Dudley et al, 2011). The reasoning bias is posited to be a trait factor associated with the severity of abnormal beliefs (Broome et al, 2007;Garety et al, 2005;So et al, 2010), which is implicated in the formation and maintenance of delusions (Blackwood et al, 2001;Freeman et al, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Jumping-to-Conclusions Bias in New Religious Movements

Lim¹,

Gleeson²,

Jackson³

2012

Journal of Nervous &Amp; Mental Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The jumping-to-conclusions bias has not been examined in a new religious movement (NRM) group. Twenty-seven delusion-prone NRM individuals were compared with 25 individuals with psychotic disorders and 63 non-delusion-prone individuals on four probabilistic inference tasks, together with measures of psychotic symptoms and delusion proneness. The NRM individuals requested significantly less evidence when compared with the control individuals on both meaningful and nonmeaningful tasks. The NRM individuals requested significantly more evidence on a difficult meaningful task when compared with the individuals with psychotic disorders. A specific reasoning style but not a general reasoning style differentiates the NRM individuals from the individuals with psychotic disorders. These findings may be specific to NRM individuals and may not be generalized to other delusion-prone groups.

show abstract

Section: The Specificity Of the Jtc Bias: Emotional Saliency And Diffmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Jumping-to-Conclusions Bias in New Religious Movements

Lim¹,

Gleeson²,

Jackson³

2012

Journal of Nervous &Amp; Mental Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many subsequent studies have confirmed this finding (for a review see Garety & Freeman, 2013). However, in much the same way as with theory of mind impairment, these studies have struggled to demonstrate an association with presence or severity of delusions (Dudley et al, 2011; Falcone et al, 2015; Freeman et al, 2014; Garety et al, 2013; Langdon, Ward, & Coltheart, 2010; Lincoln, Ziegler, Mehl, & Rief, 2010; Menon, Pomarol-Clotet, McKenna, & McCarthy, 2006; Moritz & Woodward, 2005; Mortimer et al, 1996; Ochoa et al, 2014; Peters, Thornton, Siksou, Linney, & MacCabe, 2008; So et al, 2012). …”

Section: Theories Of Delusionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can delusions be understood linguistically?

Hinzen

Rosselló

McKenna

2016

Cognitive Neuropsychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Delusions are widely believed to reflect disturbed cognitive function, but the nature of this remains elusive. The “un-Cartesian” cognitive-linguistic hypothesis maintains (a) that there is no thought separate from language, that is, there is no distinct mental space removed from language where “thinking” takes place; and (b) that a somewhat broadened concept of grammar is responsible for bestowing meaning on propositions, and this among other things gives them their quality of being true or false. It is argued that a loss of propositional meaning explains why delusions are false, impossible and sometimes fantastic. A closely related abnormality, failure of linguistic embedding, can additionally account for why delusions are held with fixed conviction and are not adequately justified by the patient. The un-Cartesian linguistic approach to delusions has points of contact with Frith’s theory that inability to form meta-representations underlies a range of schizophrenic symptoms. It may also be relevant to the nature of the “second factor” in monothematic delusions in neurological disease. Finally, it can inform the current debate about whether or not delusions really are beliefs.

show abstract

“…The sample sizes in these studies have increased [13]. In addition, the range of groups that have been considered has expanded so that studies have been undertaken with people in their first psychotic episode [14], as well people in more acute, chronic and remitting states [15,16]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rationale and protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis on reduced data gathering in people with delusions

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe tendency to form conclusions based on limited evidence is known as the ‘jumping to conclusions’ (JTC) bias, and has been a much studied phenomena in individuals with psychosis. Previous reviews have supported the hypothesis that a JTC bias is particularly linked to the formation and maintenance of delusions. A new systematic review is required as a number of studies have since been published, and older reviews are limited by not systematically assessing methodological quality or the role of study design in influencing effect size estimates. This review aimed to investigate if there is an association between psychosis or delusions and JTC bias.MethodsThe current protocol outlines the background and methodology for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Eligible articles will be identified through searches of the electronic databases PsycInfo, PubMed and Medline using relevant search terms, supplemented by hand-searches of references within eligible articles and key review articles within the field. Eligibility criteria were as follows: studies must recruit individuals with: i) schizophrenia spectrum conditions or ii) experiences of delusions. Case-control, cross-sectional, observational and prospective designs will be included but treatment trials and experimental studies excluded. Studies must use the beads task to assess JTC or a conceptually equivalent task. The outcomes will be the average number of ‘draws to a decision’ in the beads task (or related variant) and the proportion of the sample judged to demonstrate a JTC bias. Literature searches, study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and outcome quality assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers. Meta-analyses will be undertaken for continuous (mean number of ‘draws to a decision’) and binary outcomes (number of people classified as having JTC bias).DiscussionUnderstanding of the size of the JTC effect and the contexts within which it occurs is important both in terms of informing models of delusional thinking and in guiding treatments for those with delusions or psychosis. However, a definitive, up-to-date review and meta-analysis of the JTC bias is currently lacking. The proposed review will fill this gap and resolve key issues regarding the factors which moderate the JTC bias.PROSPERO registrationCRD42014007603 http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42014007603

show abstract

‘Jumping to conclusions’ in first-episode psychosis

Abstract: JTC is a phenomenon common in many people in first-episode services. In this large cohort sample, no clear associations with symptoms or other psychological processes were evident. Hence, the reason people JTC is still unclear.

Cited by 45 publications

References 27 publications

The Jumping-to-Conclusions Bias in New Religious Movements

The Jumping-to-Conclusions Bias in New Religious Movements

Can delusions be understood linguistically?

Rationale and protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis on reduced data gathering in people with delusions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About