↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Jumping to conclusions in schizophrenia

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
Title
Jumping to conclusions in schizophrenia
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s56870
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Evans, Bruno Averbeck, Nick Furl

Abstract

Schizophrenia is a mental disorder associated with a variety of symptoms, including hallucinations, delusions, social withdrawal, and cognitive dysfunction. Impairments on decision-making tasks are routinely reported: evidence points to a particular deficit in learning from and revising behavior following feedback. In addition, patients tend to make hasty decisions when probabilistic judgments are required. This is known as "jumping to conclusions" (JTC) and has typically been demonstrated by presenting participants with colored beads drawn from one of two "urns" until they claim to be sure which urn the beads are being drawn from (the proportions of colors vary in each urn). Patients tend to make early decisions on this task, and there is evidence to suggest that a hasty decision-making style might be linked to delusion formation and thus be of clinical relevance. Various accounts have been proposed regarding what underlies this behavior. In this review, we briefly introduce the disorder and the decision-making deficits associated with it. We then explore the evidence for each account of JTC in the context of a wider decision-making deficit and then go on to summarize work exploring JTC in healthy controls using pharmacological manipulations and functional imaging. Finally, we assess whether JTC might have a role in therapy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 147 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 15%
Student > Bachelor 21 14%
Researcher 20 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 9%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 24 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 61 41%
Neuroscience 17 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 31 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,231,577
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,471
of 2,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,485
of 263,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#49
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,984 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,437 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.