Can I read Jumping to conclusions in the less-delusion-prone? Preliminary evidence from a more reliable beads task on EtoBox?

Jumping to conclusions in the less-delusion-prone? Preliminary evidence from a more reliable beads task by Benjamin F. McLean; Julie K. Mattiske; Ryan P. Balzan is a Psychology article available to read on EtoBox.

What is Jumping to conclusions in the less-delusion-prone? Preliminary evidence from a more reliable beads task about?

## Background and objectives: Several meta-analyses have shown that people with psychosis tend to gather less information (i.e., they make fewer draws to decision, or dtd) on the beads task than healthy controls. a single meta-analysis has also found a small negative association between delusion-proneness and dtd in healthy samples, but with considerable heterogeneity. ## Methods: We used the new and more reliable "distractor sequences" beads task to clarify the nature of the relationship between delusion-proneness and dtd in a healthy sample. healthy participants (n = 203) completed the distractor sequences beads task and the peters delusions inventory (pdi), which measures delusion-proneness. ## Results: Pdi and dtd were positively correlated, and those who jumped to conclusions (dtd ≤ 2) had lower pdi than those who did not. comparing pdi quartiles on dtd provided some evidence the positive association did not extend to the highest pdi quartile. we found that dtd and delusion-proneness were positively related in our non-clinical sample, which was unexpected. ## Limitations: Results need replication with a clinical sample. ## Conclusions: Considering the well-established associat

Who reads Jumping to conclusions in the less-delusion-prone? Preliminary evidence from a more reliable beads task?

Author

Benjamin F. McLean; Julie K. Mattiske; Ryan P. Balzan

Publisher

Elsevier Science; Elsevier ; Elsevier Ltd.; Elsevier BV (ISSN 0005-7916)

Published

2020

Language

EN

Field

Psychology (Social Sciences)