早期精神病患者决策过程中的成本评估

A. Ermakova, Nimrod Gileadi, F. Knolle, A. Justicia, R. Anderson, P. Fletcher, M. Moutoussis, G. Murray
{"title":"早期精神病患者决策过程中的成本评估","authors":"A. Ermakova, Nimrod Gileadi, F. Knolle, A. Justicia, R. Anderson, P. Fletcher, M. Moutoussis, G. Murray","doi":"10.1101/225920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Jumping to conclusions during probabilistic reasoning is a cognitive bias reliably observed in psychosis, and linked to delusion formation. Although the reasons for this cognitive bias are unknown, one suggestion is that psychosis patients may view sampling information as more costly. However, previous computational modelling has provided evidence that patients with chronic schizophrenia jump to conclusion because of noisy decision making. We developed a novel version of the classical beads-task, systematically manipulating the cost of information gathering in four blocks. For 31 individuals with early symptoms of psychosis and 31 healthy volunteers, we examined the numbers of ‘draws to decision’ when information sampling had no, a fixed, or an escalating cost. Computational modelling involved estimating a cost of information sampling parameter and a cognitive noise parameter. Overall patients sampled less information than controls. However, group differences in numbers of draws became less prominent at higher cost trials, where less information was sampled. The attenuation of group difference was not due to floor effects, as in the most costly block participants sampled more information than an ideal Bayesian agent. Computational modelling showed that, in the condition with no objective cost to information sampling, patients attributed higher costs to information sampling than controls (Mann-Whiney U=289, p=0.007), with marginal evidence of differences in noise parameter estimates (t=1.86 df=60, p=0.07). In patients, individual differences in severity of psychotic symptoms were statistically significantly associated with higher cost of information sampling (rho=0.6, p=0.001) but not with more cognitive noise (rho=0.27, p=0.14); in controls cognitive noise predicted aspects of schizotypy (preoccupation and distress associated with delusion-like ideation on the Peters Delusion Inventory). Using a psychological manipulation and computational modelling, we provide evidence that early psychosis patients jump to conclusions because of attributing higher costs to sampling information, not because of being primarily noisy decision makers.","PeriodicalId":72664,"journal":{"name":"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)","volume":"97 1","pages":"18 - 39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost Evaluation During Decision-Making in Patients at Early Stages of Psychosis\",\"authors\":\"A. Ermakova, Nimrod Gileadi, F. Knolle, A. Justicia, R. Anderson, P. Fletcher, M. Moutoussis, G. Murray\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/225920\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Jumping to conclusions during probabilistic reasoning is a cognitive bias reliably observed in psychosis, and linked to delusion formation. Although the reasons for this cognitive bias are unknown, one suggestion is that psychosis patients may view sampling information as more costly. However, previous computational modelling has provided evidence that patients with chronic schizophrenia jump to conclusion because of noisy decision making. We developed a novel version of the classical beads-task, systematically manipulating the cost of information gathering in four blocks. For 31 individuals with early symptoms of psychosis and 31 healthy volunteers, we examined the numbers of ‘draws to decision’ when information sampling had no, a fixed, or an escalating cost. Computational modelling involved estimating a cost of information sampling parameter and a cognitive noise parameter. Overall patients sampled less information than controls. However, group differences in numbers of draws became less prominent at higher cost trials, where less information was sampled. The attenuation of group difference was not due to floor effects, as in the most costly block participants sampled more information than an ideal Bayesian agent. Computational modelling showed that, in the condition with no objective cost to information sampling, patients attributed higher costs to information sampling than controls (Mann-Whiney U=289, p=0.007), with marginal evidence of differences in noise parameter estimates (t=1.86 df=60, p=0.07). In patients, individual differences in severity of psychotic symptoms were statistically significantly associated with higher cost of information sampling (rho=0.6, p=0.001) but not with more cognitive noise (rho=0.27, p=0.14); in controls cognitive noise predicted aspects of schizotypy (preoccupation and distress associated with delusion-like ideation on the Peters Delusion Inventory). Using a psychological manipulation and computational modelling, we provide evidence that early psychosis patients jump to conclusions because of attributing higher costs to sampling information, not because of being primarily noisy decision makers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)\",\"volume\":\"97 1\",\"pages\":\"18 - 39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/225920\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/225920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

在概率推理过程中直接下结论是一种认知偏差,在精神病中可以可靠地观察到,并与错觉形成有关。虽然这种认知偏差的原因尚不清楚,但有一种说法是精神病患者可能认为抽样信息的成本更高。然而,先前的计算模型已经提供了证据,表明慢性精神分裂症患者由于嘈杂的决策而过早下结论。我们开发了一个新版本的经典的头部任务,系统地操纵四个区块的信息收集成本。对于31名有早期精神病症状的个体和31名健康志愿者,我们检查了在信息采样没有成本、固定成本或不断上升的成本时,“决定的吸引力”的数量。计算模型包括估计信息采样参数和认知噪声参数的代价。总的来说,患者取样的信息少于对照组。然而,在高成本的试验中,组间抽签数量的差异变得不那么突出,因为在高成本的试验中,抽样的信息较少。组差异的衰减不是由于底部效应,因为在最昂贵的区块中,参与者比理想的贝叶斯代理取样了更多的信息。计算模型显示,在没有客观信息采样成本的情况下,患者认为信息采样成本高于对照组(Mann-Whiney U=289, p=0.007),噪声参数估计存在边际差异(t=1.86 df=60, p=0.07)。在患者中,精神病症状严重程度的个体差异与较高的信息采样成本(rho=0.6, p=0.001)相关,但与较高的认知噪声无关(rho=0.27, p=0.14);在对照组中,认知噪音预测了精神分裂的某些方面(彼得斯妄想量表中与妄想样观念相关的专注和痛苦)。使用心理操作和计算模型,我们提供了证据,证明早期精神病患者因为将更高的成本归因于采样信息,而不是因为主要是嘈杂的决策者而得出结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost Evaluation During Decision-Making in Patients at Early Stages of Psychosis
Jumping to conclusions during probabilistic reasoning is a cognitive bias reliably observed in psychosis, and linked to delusion formation. Although the reasons for this cognitive bias are unknown, one suggestion is that psychosis patients may view sampling information as more costly. However, previous computational modelling has provided evidence that patients with chronic schizophrenia jump to conclusion because of noisy decision making. We developed a novel version of the classical beads-task, systematically manipulating the cost of information gathering in four blocks. For 31 individuals with early symptoms of psychosis and 31 healthy volunteers, we examined the numbers of ‘draws to decision’ when information sampling had no, a fixed, or an escalating cost. Computational modelling involved estimating a cost of information sampling parameter and a cognitive noise parameter. Overall patients sampled less information than controls. However, group differences in numbers of draws became less prominent at higher cost trials, where less information was sampled. The attenuation of group difference was not due to floor effects, as in the most costly block participants sampled more information than an ideal Bayesian agent. Computational modelling showed that, in the condition with no objective cost to information sampling, patients attributed higher costs to information sampling than controls (Mann-Whiney U=289, p=0.007), with marginal evidence of differences in noise parameter estimates (t=1.86 df=60, p=0.07). In patients, individual differences in severity of psychotic symptoms were statistically significantly associated with higher cost of information sampling (rho=0.6, p=0.001) but not with more cognitive noise (rho=0.27, p=0.14); in controls cognitive noise predicted aspects of schizotypy (preoccupation and distress associated with delusion-like ideation on the Peters Delusion Inventory). Using a psychological manipulation and computational modelling, we provide evidence that early psychosis patients jump to conclusions because of attributing higher costs to sampling information, not because of being primarily noisy decision makers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信