Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering. / Ross, Robert; McKay, Ryan; Coltheart, Max; Langdon, Robyn.

In: Schizophrenia bulletin, Vol. 41, No. 5, 09.2015, p. 1183-1191.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering. / Ross, Robert; McKay, Ryan; Coltheart, Max; Langdon, Robyn.

In: Schizophrenia bulletin, Vol. 41, No. 5, 09.2015, p. 1183-1191.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Ross, R, McKay, R, Coltheart, M & Langdon, R 2015, 'Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering', Schizophrenia bulletin, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 1183-1191. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbu187

APA

Vancouver

Author

Ross, Robert ; McKay, Ryan ; Coltheart, Max ; Langdon, Robyn. / Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering. In: Schizophrenia bulletin. 2015 ; Vol. 41, No. 5. pp. 1183-1191.

BibTeX

@article{7efc4dd77ed64fa7b2c76551adba9abb,
title = "Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering",
abstract = "It has been claimed that delusional and delusion-prone individuals have a tendency to gather less data before forming beliefs. Most of the evidence for this “jumping to conclusions” (JTC) bias comes from studies using the “beads task” data-gathering paradigm. However, the evidence for the JTC bias is mixed. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of individual participant data from 38 clinical and non-clinical samples (n = 2238) to investigate the relationship between data gathering in the beads task (using the “draws to decision” measure) and delusional ideation (as indexed by the “Peters et al. Delusional Inventory”; PDI). We found that delusional ideation is negatively associated with data gathering (rs = -0.10, 95% CI [-0.17, -0.03]) and that there is heterogeneity in the estimated effect sizes (Q-stat p = 0.03, I2 = 33). Subgroup analysis revealed that the negative association was present when considering the 23 samples (n = 1754) drawn from the large general population subgroup alone (rs = -0.10, 95% CI [-0.18, -0.02]) but not the eight samples (n = 263) drawn from the much smaller current delusions subgroup alone (rs = -0.13, 95% CI [-0.33, 0.06]). These results provide some provisional support for continuum theories of psychosis and for cognitive models that implicate the JTC bias in the formation and maintenance of delusions. ",
keywords = "bias, beads task, delusion, jumping to conclusions, meta-analysis, schizophrenia",
author = "Robert Ross and Ryan McKay and Max Coltheart and Robyn Langdon",
year = "2015",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1093/schbul/sbu187",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "1183--1191",
journal = "Schizophrenia bulletin",
issn = "0586-7614",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "5",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Jumping to Conclusions About the Beads Task? A Meta-analysis of Delusional Ideation and Data-Gathering

AU - Ross, Robert

AU - McKay, Ryan

AU - Coltheart, Max

AU - Langdon, Robyn

PY - 2015/9

Y1 - 2015/9

N2 - It has been claimed that delusional and delusion-prone individuals have a tendency to gather less data before forming beliefs. Most of the evidence for this “jumping to conclusions” (JTC) bias comes from studies using the “beads task” data-gathering paradigm. However, the evidence for the JTC bias is mixed. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of individual participant data from 38 clinical and non-clinical samples (n = 2238) to investigate the relationship between data gathering in the beads task (using the “draws to decision” measure) and delusional ideation (as indexed by the “Peters et al. Delusional Inventory”; PDI). We found that delusional ideation is negatively associated with data gathering (rs = -0.10, 95% CI [-0.17, -0.03]) and that there is heterogeneity in the estimated effect sizes (Q-stat p = 0.03, I2 = 33). Subgroup analysis revealed that the negative association was present when considering the 23 samples (n = 1754) drawn from the large general population subgroup alone (rs = -0.10, 95% CI [-0.18, -0.02]) but not the eight samples (n = 263) drawn from the much smaller current delusions subgroup alone (rs = -0.13, 95% CI [-0.33, 0.06]). These results provide some provisional support for continuum theories of psychosis and for cognitive models that implicate the JTC bias in the formation and maintenance of delusions.

AB - It has been claimed that delusional and delusion-prone individuals have a tendency to gather less data before forming beliefs. Most of the evidence for this “jumping to conclusions” (JTC) bias comes from studies using the “beads task” data-gathering paradigm. However, the evidence for the JTC bias is mixed. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of individual participant data from 38 clinical and non-clinical samples (n = 2238) to investigate the relationship between data gathering in the beads task (using the “draws to decision” measure) and delusional ideation (as indexed by the “Peters et al. Delusional Inventory”; PDI). We found that delusional ideation is negatively associated with data gathering (rs = -0.10, 95% CI [-0.17, -0.03]) and that there is heterogeneity in the estimated effect sizes (Q-stat p = 0.03, I2 = 33). Subgroup analysis revealed that the negative association was present when considering the 23 samples (n = 1754) drawn from the large general population subgroup alone (rs = -0.10, 95% CI [-0.18, -0.02]) but not the eight samples (n = 263) drawn from the much smaller current delusions subgroup alone (rs = -0.13, 95% CI [-0.33, 0.06]). These results provide some provisional support for continuum theories of psychosis and for cognitive models that implicate the JTC bias in the formation and maintenance of delusions.

KW - bias

KW - beads task

KW - delusion

KW - jumping to conclusions

KW - meta-analysis

KW - schizophrenia

U2 - 10.1093/schbul/sbu187

DO - 10.1093/schbul/sbu187

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 1183

EP - 1191

JO - Schizophrenia bulletin

JF - Schizophrenia bulletin

SN - 0586-7614

IS - 5

ER -