Evidence mapPaperPMID 42528865Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026

Gone fishin'… for distinct patterns of belief-updating in late-life worry and rumination.

Angela M Ianni, Vanessa M Brown, Andrea M Weinstein, Mingqian Li, Carmen Andreescu, Andrew R Gerlach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Angela M IanniDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Vanessa M BrownDepartment of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Andrea M WeinsteinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Mingqian LiDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Carmen AndreescuDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Andrew R GerlachDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Worry and rumination are two common forms of repetitive negative thinking encountered as core symptoms of anxiety and depression. They are difficult to treat and increase the risk of relapse for remitted depressive and anxiety disorders, especially in late-life. We propose that dysfunctional belief-updating is a fundamental cognitive mechanism underlying repetitive negative thinking and use a Bayesian model to test whether distinct components of belief updating are differentially associated with worry and rumination. Methods: We recruited 83 older participants (age≥50) dimensionally for worry and rumination to perform a belief-updating task and undergo neuropsychological testing. We extracted three parameters from a Bayesian model of belief-updating: performance compared to the Bayesian optimal model, emphasis on initial information (prior weight), and relative weighting of new evidence compared to current beliefs (update strength). These parameters were tested for associations with worry and rumination severity, and four neuropsychological domains were tested as moderators (attention, visuospatial, working memory maintenance, and executive function). Results: Worry severity was uniquely associated with lower prior weight, while rumination was associated with low update strength. Neither worry nor rumination were associated with performance. None of the neuropsychological domains moderated these relationships. Conclusion: Worry and rumination are associated with unique alterations in belief-updating but not overall performance. Low prior weight in worry may inflate perceived uncertainty, while low update strength in rumination-specifically reflective pondering-is consistent with slower incorporation of new information. Both biases may contribute to the distinct phenomenological profiles of worry and rumination and inform specific therapeutic targets for these symptoms.

Indexed as

bayesian modelbelief-updatingcomputational psychiatryrepetitive negative thinkingruminationworry

Identifiers

PMID42528865
PMCPMC13415504

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.