Perceptual biases and metacognition and their association with anomalous self experiences in first episode psychosis

Wright, Abigail; Nelson, Barnaby; Fowler, David; Greenwood, Kathryn

doi:10.1016/j.concog.2019.102847

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been suggested that implicit metacognition relies on a different cognitive system than explicit metacognition and is only minimally dependent on working memory [57]. These findings are also in line with recent reports of intact implicit metacognition in SCZ [44] and metacognitive efficiency in first episode psychosis [58]. Interestingly, metamemory was negatively related to estimated volatility.…”

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 85%

Overestimation of volatility in schizophrenia and autism? A comparative study using a probabilistic reasoning task

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives A plethora of studies has investigated and compared social cognition in autism and schizophrenia ever since both conditions were first described in conjunction more than a century ago. Recent computational theories have proposed similar mechanistic explanations for various symptoms beyond social cognition. They are grounded in the idea of a general misestimation of uncertainty but so far, almost no studies have directly compared both conditions regarding uncertainty processing. The current study aimed to do so with a particular focus on estimation of volatility, i.e. the probability for the environment to change. Methods A probabilistic decision-making task and a visual working (meta-)memory task were administered to a sample of 86 participants (19 with a diagnosis of high-functioning autism, 21 with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, and 46 neurotypically developing individuals). Results While persons with schizophrenia showed lower visual working memory accuracy than neurotypical individuals, no significant group differences were found for metamemory or any of the probabilistic decision-making task variables. Nevertheless, exploratory analyses suggest that there may be an overestimation of volatility in subgroups of participants with autism and schizophrenia. Correlations revealed relationships between different variables reflecting (mis)estimation of uncertainty, visual working memory accuracy and metamemory. Limitations Limitations include the comparably small sample sizes of the autism and the schizophrenia group as well as the lack of cognitive ability and clinical symptom measures. Conclusions The results of the current study provide partial support for the notion of a general uncertainty misestimation account of autism and schizophrenia.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 85%

Overestimation of volatility in schizophrenia and autism? A comparative study using a probabilistic reasoning task

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies employing this design have reported lower metacognitive performance in schizophrenia compared to healthy controls across different cognitive domains such as vision (Dietrichkeit et al, 2020;Jia et al, 2020;Moritz et al, 2014), audition (Gaweda & Moritz, 2019), emotion perception (Kother et al, 2012;Pinkham et al, 2018), and memory (Berna et al, 2019;Mayer & Park, 2012;. However, these results are mitigated by recent studies that failed to reveal such metacognitive deficits (Faivre et al, 2019;Powers et al, 2017;Wright et al, 2020). Noticeably these studies controlled for potential group differences in first-order performance, either at the design level through adaptive procedures (Levitt, 1971), or at the metric level through indices of metacognitive performance which are independent from first-order performance (Maniscalco & Lau, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Systematic review and meta-analysis of metacognitive abilities in individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders

Rouy

Saliou²,

Nalborczyk³

et al. 2021

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Taking into account that the believing subjects in the "supernatural" tend to present higher levels in the different scales that measure hallucinations and perceptual deformations with respect to non-believers (see Matute et al, 2011;Griffiths et al, 2018;Torres et al, 2020;Wright et al, 2020), a possible way for the covariation between the macrofactors to increase would be by replicating the CFA for the 5-factor model only with subjects believing in the existence of the paranormal. It seems likely that the participants of this sample do not believe in the existence of the paranormal with the same intensity as the subjects of the Spanish samples.…”

Section: Criticisms and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Multivariable Multiaxial Suggestibility Inventory-2 (MMSI-2): A Psychometric Alternative to Measure and Explain Supernatural Experiences

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the English adaptation of the Multivariable Multiaxial Suggestibility Inventory-2 (MMSI-2), a questionnaire developed specifically for psychological assessment and prediction of anomalous phenomena. The sample consisted of 613 respondents from England (47.6% were women and 52.4% men). All of them were of legal age (mean = 34.5; standard deviation = 8.15). An exploratory factor analysis was applied, and three confirmatory factor models were adjusted. Omega coefficients and test-retest designs were used for reliability analysis. The MMSI-2 has a valid internal structure consisting of five macrofactors: Clinical Personality Tendencies (CPT), Anomalous Perceived Phenomena (APP), Incoherent Manipulations (IMA), Altered States of Consciousness (ASC), and Openness (OP). Omega coefficients for CPT and OP factors were low but acceptable. Furthermore, test-retest trials were excellent for all scales and factors. The psychological factors CPT, IMA, and ASC predicted 18.3% of the variance of anomalous experiences (APP). The authors concluded the English MMSI-2 was a valid and reliable test for the evaluation of anomalous phenomena but recommend that subsequent research reviews the predictive quality of the underlying model.

show abstract

Perceptual biases and metacognition and their association with anomalous self experiences in first episode psychosis

Cited by 16 publications

References 75 publications

Overestimation of volatility in schizophrenia and autism? A comparative study using a probabilistic reasoning task

Overestimation of volatility in schizophrenia and autism? A comparative study using a probabilistic reasoning task

Systematic review and meta-analysis of metacognitive abilities in individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders

The Multivariable Multiaxial Suggestibility Inventory-2 (MMSI-2): A Psychometric Alternative to Measure and Explain Supernatural Experiences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About