↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

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

Simon L Evans, Bruno B Averbeck, Nicholas 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 161 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 158 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 14%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 9%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 30 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 64 40%
Neuroscience 18 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 2%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 38 24%
Attention Score in Context

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
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,719
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,960
of 277,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#63
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 277,610 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.