首页> 外文期刊>The British journal of clinical psychology >Reasoning bias and belief conviction in obsessive-compulsive disorder and delusions: jumping to conclusions across disorders?
【24h】

Reasoning bias and belief conviction in obsessive-compulsive disorder and delusions: jumping to conclusions across disorders?

机译:强迫症和妄想中的推理偏见和信念被定罪:能否跨疾病得出结论?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated whether a reasoning bias ('jumping to conclusions'; JTC) found to be associated with higher levels of conviction in delusions is also associated with high-conviction beliefs in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). DESIGN: The experimental design was mixed-effects, with one between-subjects factor of group and one within-subjects factor of task. METHODS: Participants were 16 people with high-conviction OCD (>/= 50%), 16 people with low-conviction OCD (< 50%), 16 people with delusions (>/= 50% conviction), and 16 non-clinical controls. JTC was assessed using a neutral probabilistic reasoning task (beads task) and a version involving words of differing emotional salience (words task). RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in draws to decision on the beads task between the high-conviction OCD group, the low-conviction OCD group, and the non-clinical controls. The delusions group made significantly fewer draws to decision compared to the non-clinical controls on the words task but not the beads task and significantly fewer draws on both tasks compared with the combined OCD group. Emotionally salient material (words task) did not affect draws to decision in any group. CONCLUSIONS: JTC is associated with delusions but not high-conviction beliefs in OCD. The cognitive processes associated with high-conviction beliefs in OCD and psychosis may not be trans-diagnostic. This is consistent with the view that high-conviction OCD should not be classified as a psychotic disorder.
机译:目的:这项研究调查了被认为与妄想中较高的定罪水平相关的推理偏差(“跳至结论”; JTC)是否也与强迫症(OCD)的高信念信念相关。设计:实验设计是混合效应,小组的一个受试者间因素和一个任务的受试者内因素。方法:参加者有16名高信念强迫症(> / = 50%),16名低信念强迫症(<50%),16名妄想(> / = 50%信念)和16名非临床控制。使用中性概率推理任务(珠子任务)和涉及不同情感显着性的单词(单词任务)的版本对JTC进行了评估。结果:高信念强迫症组,低信念强迫症组和非临床对照在决定珠子任务上的决定上无统计学差异。与非临床对照相比,妄想小组在单词任务上做出决策的吸引力要少得多,与珠串任务相比,做出决定的决策要少得多,与合并的OCD组相比,这两项任务的决策得出的决策要少得多。情感突出的材料(言语任务)不影响任何小组中的决定抽签。结论:JTC与妄想有关,但与强迫症中的高信念信念无关。与强迫症和精神病的高信念信念相关的认知过程可能无法进行诊断。这与高信念强迫症不应被归类为精神病的观点是一致的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号