The contribution of hypersalience to the “jumping to conclusions” bias associated with delusions in schizophrenia

Background Previous schizophrenia research involving the “beads task” has suggested an association between delusions and 2 reasoning biases: (1) “jumping to conclusions” (JTC), whereby early, resolute decisions are formed on the basis of little evidence and (2) over-adjustment of probability estimates following a single instance of disconfirmatory evidence. In the current study, we used a novel JTC-style paradigm to provide new information about a cognitive operation common to these 2 reasoning biases. Methods Using a task that required participants to rate the likelihood that a fisherman was catching a series of black or white fish from Lake A and not Lake B, and vice versa, we compared the responses of 4 groups (healthy, bipolar, nondelusional schizophrenia and delusional schizophrenia) when we manipulated 2 elements of the Bayesian formula: incoming data and prior odds. Results Regardless of our manipulations of the Bayesian formula, the delusional schizophrenia group gave significantly higher likelihood ratings for the lake that best matched the colour of the presented fish, but the ratings for the nonmatching lake did not differ from the other groups. Limitations The limitations of this study include a small sample size for the group of severely delusional patients and a preponderance of men in the schizophrenia sample. Conclusion Delusions in schizophrenia are associated with hypersalience of evidence–hypothesis matches but normal salience of nonmatches. When the colour of the incoming data is uniform (fish of only one colour), this manifests as JTC early in a series, and when the colour of incoming data varies (both black and white fish), this manifests as an overadjustment midseries. This account can provide a unifying explanation for delusion-associated performance patterns previously observed in the beads task in schizophrenia.