Examining Cognitive Biases Uniquely Associated with Schizotypy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Individuals with schizotypy can experience a number of cognitive biases that may increase their risk in developing schizophrenia-spectrum psychopathology. However, cognitive biases are also present in mood and anxiety disorders, and it is currently unclear which biases are specific to schizotypy and which may be a result of comorbid depression and/or anxiety. METHODS: 462 participants completed measures of depression, anxiety, cognitive biases, cognitive schemas, and schizotypy. Correlation analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between these constructs. Three hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to examine if schizotypy, depression, and anxiety explained a statistically significant amount of variance in cognitive biases after controlling for depression and anxiety, schizotypy and anxiety, and schizotypy and depression, respectively. Moderated regression analyses were also conducted to investigate the moderating role of biological sex and ethnicity in the association between cognitive biases and schizotypy. RESULTS: Self-referential processing, belief inflexibility, and attention for threat were associated with schizotypy. The belief inflexibility bias and social cognition problems were specifically associated with schizotypy after controlling for depression and anxiety and were not directly associated with either depression or anxiety. These associations were not moderated by biological sex or ethnicity. CONCLUSION: The belief inflexibility bias may be an important cognitive bias underlying schizotypal personality, and further research will be important to determine whether this bias is also associated with an increased likelihood of transitioning to psychosis.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".