ArticleSchizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
Relating latent factors of reasoning, affect, and cognition to the delusional experience.
Article in Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reasoning biases play a crucial role in the formation and maintenance of delusions. In psychosis, it is unclear whether these biases cluster onto similar underlying factors or represent independent constructs. The current study presents data on task-based reasoning biases and self-reported cognitive biases, as well as cognition and affect. Using these data, we aimed to understand mechanisms underlying facets of clinical delusional severity and broader unusual thought content. Participants with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSD; N = 75) were enrolled following hospitalization for an acute psychotic episode. Non-clinical comparison participants (NCC; N = 70) were recruited for comparison of affect, cognition, and reasoning biases. Exploratory factor analysis and multivariable linear regressions were performed in the SSD group only. Core clinical delusions and broader unusual thought content, alongside preoccupation, conviction, and distress were used as outcome measures. SSD participants had more severe reasoning biases, cognitive deficits, and negative affect than NCC. In SSD, factor analysis revealed four latent constructs representing belief updating, cognitive biases, affective disturbances, and general cognitive ability. Affect was significantly associated with delusional preoccupation and distress. Belief updating was the primary factor associated with conviction. Cognitive biases related to the number of unusual beliefs endorsed, but no other aspects of severity. General cognitive ability was unrelated to all facets of delusional severity in our sample. Affective disturbances and belief updating map onto distinct aspects of clinical delusions in SSD; delusion severity is not robustly related to cognitive impairment. Reducing delusional conviction may require treatments focused on how new evidence is integrated into existing beliefs.
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.