ArticleNpj mental health research2025
The joint estimation of uncertainty and its relationship with psychotic-like traits and psychometric schizotypy.
Article in Npj mental health research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Anhedonia and Anxious Arousal Are Associated With Distinct Expectations About the Statistics of a Volatile Environment.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Learning involves reducing the uncertainty of incoming information-does it reflect meaningful change (volatility) or random noise? Normative accounts of learning capture the interconnectedness of this uncertainty: learning increases when changes are perceived as meaningful (volatility) and reduces when changes are seen as noise. Misestimating uncertainty-especially volatility-may contribute to psychotic symptoms, yet studies often overlook the interdependence of noise. We developed a block-design task that manipulated both noise and volatility using inputs from ground-truth distributions, with incentivised trial-wise estimates. Across three general population samples (online Ns = 580/147; in-person N = 19), participants showed normative learning overall. However, psychometric schizotypy and delusional ideation were linked to non-normative patterns. Paranoia was associated with poorer performance and reduced insight. All traits showed inflexible adaptation to changing uncertainty. Computational modelling suggested that non-normative learning may reflect difficulties inferring noise. This could lead one to misinterpret randomness as meaningful. Capturing joint uncertainty estimation offers insights into psychosis and supports clinically relevant computational phenotyping.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.