Unravelling the jumping to conclusions bias in daily life and health-related decision-making scenarios

被引:1
作者
Peinado, Vanesa [1 ]
Valiente, Carmen [1 ]
Contreras, Alba [2 ]
Trucharte, Almudena [3 ]
Vazquez, Carmelo
机构
[1] Univ Complutense Madrid, Dept Clin Psychol, Madrid, Spain
[2] Univ Autonoma, Dept Psychol, Madrid, Spain
[3] Camilo Jose Cela Univ, Sch Educ & Hlth, Dept Psychol, Madrid, Spain
关键词
Jumping to conclusions; Cognitive reflection; Cognitive bias; Anxiety; Paranoia; Conspiracy mentality; Optimism; Reasoning; ANXIETY; DELUSIONS; IDEATION; PEOPLE;
D O I
10.1016/j.paid.2024.112782
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Reasoning biases are ubiquitous and may lead to errors in daily situations. Jumping to Conclusions (JTC) is the tendency to reach decisions based on scarce data. This study examines JTC in daily life and health-related scenarios, presenting primarily positive or negative information for decision-making. Two population-based surveys containing an experimental paradigm to measure JTC were conducted in a representative sample (N = 1949) during the first month of COVID-19 confinement. JTC task presented daily and health-related scenarios, providing predominantly positive or negative decision-making information. JTC bias prevalence was significantly higher in daily life scenarios and when deciding with mostly negative information. Specifically, when mainly negative information was available, anxiety raised the JTC likelihood in health-related scenarios, while higher levels of paranoid beliefs increased JTC in daily life-related scenarios. Optimism and age increased the JTC odds in decisions where available information was predominantly positive. Findings highlight contextual and psychological characteristics influencing decision-making in health and daily life issues.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 55 条
[1]  
Albagmi Faisal Mashel, 2022, Inform Med Unlocked, V28, P100854, DOI 10.1016/j.imu.2022.100854
[2]   Trait anxiety and reasoning under uncertainty [J].
Bensi, Luca ;
Giusberti, Fiorella .
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2007, 43 (04) :827-838
[3]   Development and validation of the openness to the future scale: a prospective protective factor [J].
Botella, C. ;
Molinari, G. ;
Fernandez-Alvarez, J. ;
Guillen, V. ;
Garcia-Palacios, A. ;
Banos, R. M. ;
Tomas, J. M. .
HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2018, 16
[4]   Dual-process theory, conflict processing, and delusional belief [J].
Bronstein, Michael V. ;
Pennycook, Gordon ;
Joormann, Jutta ;
Corlett, Philip R. ;
Cannon, Tyrone D. .
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2019, 72
[5]   Delusion formation and reasoning biases in those at clinical high risk for psychosis [J].
Broome, M. R. ;
Johns, L. C. ;
Valli, I. ;
Woolley, J. B. ;
Tabraham, P. ;
Brett, C. ;
Valmaggia, L. ;
Peters, E. ;
Garety, P. A. ;
McGuire, P. K. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2007, 191 :S38-S42
[6]   Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire [J].
Bruder, Martin ;
Haffke, Peter ;
Neave, Nick ;
Nouripanah, Nina ;
Imhoff, Roland .
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2013, 4
[7]   The intolerance of uncertainty scale: psychometric properties of the English version [J].
Buhr, K ;
Dugas, MJ .
BEHAVIOUR RESEARCH AND THERAPY, 2002, 40 (08) :931-945
[8]   Models of persecutory delusions: a mechanistic insight into the early stages of psychosis [J].
Diaconescu, Andreea Oliviana ;
Hauke, Daniel Jonas ;
Borgwardt, Stefan .
MOLECULAR PSYCHIATRY, 2019, 24 (09) :1258-1267
[9]   People with delusions jump to conclusions: A theoretical account of research findings on the reasoning of people with delusions [J].
Dudley, REJ ;
Over, DE .
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY & PSYCHOTHERAPY, 2003, 10 (05) :263-274
[10]   The effect of self-referent material on the reasoning of people with delusions [J].
Dudley, REJ ;
John, CH ;
Young, AW ;
Over, DE .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 36 :575-584