MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018976888 · doi:10.1080/13546805.2010.536084

Incorrigibility, jumping to conclusions, and decision threshold in schizophrenia

2011· article· en· W2018976888 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Neuropsychiatry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelusionPsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Thought disorderSentenceDelusional disorderPsychosisIdeationPsychiatryCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies confirmed a bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE) for both delusional and delusion-neutral events in paranoid schizophrenia. In the present study, we examined a potential relationship between the BADE and delusional ideation. METHODS: Fifty-five patients with schizophrenia (32 with current delusions), 20 patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder and 30 healthy participants were presented written scenarios composed of three successive sentences which increasingly disambiguated the situation. Participants were asked to rate interpretations presented along with the sentences. After each new sentence, participants could adjust their judgements in view of the new information. One interpretation ("true") did not seem to fit the first statement but became increasingly plausible, whereas "lure" interpretations appeared very likely initially but were eventually incorrect. Patients were given the option to decide for one of the statements. RESULTS: Patients with schizophrenia, irrespective of delusion severity, attenuated their ratings significantly less for lure interpretations in face of disconfirmatory evidence (BADE) compared to both control groups. We found no impairment regarding the integration of confirmatory evidence. Patients with schizophrenia made more incorrect decisions after the first sentence indicating jumping to conclusions relative to healthy controls. Participants with schizophrenia showed a lowered decision threshold compared to the controls. CONCLUSIONS: The findings lend further evidence to the claim that patients with schizophrenia are hastier and rather inflexible in their decision making. This response pattern may represent a trait-like vulnerability factor for the emergence of delusional incorrigibility, a hallmark symptom of schizophrenia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it