Dudley, R

Hutton, Paul

Taylor, P. J.

English

BackgroundThe tendency to form conclusions based on limited evidence is known as the ‘jumping to conclusions’ (JTC) bias, and has been a much studied phenomena in individuals with psychosis. Previous reviews have supported the hypothesis that a JTC bias is particularly linked to the formation and maintenance of delusions. A new systematic review is required as a number of studies have since been published, and older reviews are limited by not systematically assessing methodological quality or the role of study design in influencing effect size estimates. This review aimed to investigate if there is an association between psychosis or delusions and JTC bias.MethodsThe current protocol outlines the background and methodology for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Eligible articles will be identified through searches of the electronic databases PsycInfo, PubMed and Medline using relevant search terms, supplemented by hand-searches of references within eligible articles and key review articles within the field. Eligibility criteria were as follows: studies must recruit individuals with: i) schizophrenia spectrum conditions or ii) experiences of delusions. Case-control, cross-sectional, observational and prospective designs will be included but treatment trials and experimental studies excluded. Studies must use the beads task to assess JTC or a conceptually equivalent task. The outcomes will be the average number of ‘draws to a decision’ in the beads task (or related variant) and the proportion of the sample judged to demonstrate a JTC bias. Literature searches, study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and outcome quality assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers. Meta-analyses will be undertaken for continuous (mean number of ‘draws to a decision’) and binary outcomes (number of people classified as having JTC bias).DiscussionUnderstanding of the size of the JTC effect and the contexts within which it occurs is important both in terms of informing models of delusional thinking and in guiding treatments for those with delusions or psychosis. However, a definitive, up-to-date review and meta-analysis of the JTC bias is currently lacking. The proposed review will fill this gap and resolve key issues regarding the factors which moderate the JTC bias

Edinburgh Research Explorer

Addressing reporting biases.I nCochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Edited by Higgins JPT, Chichester GS.

Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I 2 index? Psychol Methods

Bartzokis GAP: The vulnerability/stress model of schizophrenic relapse: a longitudinal study. Acta Psychiatr Scand

Bentall RP: ‘Jumping to conclusions’ and attributional style in persecutory delusions. Cognitive Ther Res

Bouter LM: Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.

Calculating and synthesizing effect sizes. Contemp Issues Commun Sci Disord

Clever Hans (The Horse of Mr. von Osten): A Contribution to Experimental Animal and Human Psychology.

Cognitive approaches to delusions: a critical review of theories and evidence.

Comprehensive Metaanalysis, version 2. Engelwood, NJ: Biostat;

DE: The effect of self-referent material on the reasoning of people with delusions.

DR: Probabilistic judgements in deluded and non-deluded subjects.

Garety P: Jumping to conclusions and paranoid ideation in the general population. Schizophr Res

Hopping, skipping or jumping to conclusions? Clarifying the role of the JTC bias in delusions. Cogn Neuropsychiatry

HR: Introduction to Meta-Analysis.

JAC: The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Br Med J

Jumping to conclusions and perceptions in early psychosis: relationship with delusional beliefs. Cogn Neuropsychiatry

Jumping to conclusions in psychosis: a faulty appraisal. Schizophr Res

Jumping to conclusions’ in first-episode psychosis. Early Interv Psychiatry

Lindenmayer JP: The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS): rationale and standardization.

People with delusions jump to conclusions: a theoretical account of research findings on the reasoning of people with delusions. Clin Psychol Psychother

Reasoning, emotions, and delusional conviction in psychosis.

S: Cochrane Collaboration: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

Schünemann HJ: GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

Suspicious minds: the psychology of persecutory delusions. Clin Psychol Rev

Targeting reasoning biases in delusions: a pilot study of the Maudsley review training programme for individuals with persistent, high conviction delusions. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry

The jumping to conclusions bias in delusions: specificity and changeability.

The past and future of delusions research: from the inexplicable to the treatable.

The PRISMA Group: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Br Med J

TS: Jumping to conclusions in delusional and non-delusional schizophrenic patients.

When does jumping-toconclusions reach its peak? The interaction of vulnerability and situation-characteristics in social reasoning. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry

Rationale and protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis on reduced data gathering in people with delusions

Rationale and protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis on reduced data gathering in people with delusions

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Edinburgh Research Explorer