Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32269791›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2020

Paranoia, sensitization and social inference: findings from two large-scale, multi-round behavioural experiments.

J M Barnby, Q Deeley, O Robinson, N Raihani, V Bell, M A Mehta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Psychotomimetic compensation versus sensitization.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Social reward, punishment, and prosociality in paranoia.Journal of abnormal psychology · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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.

J M BarnbySocial and Cultural Neuroscience Research Group, Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6002-1362
Q DeeleySocial and Cultural Neuroscience Research Group, Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
O RobinsonInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, UK.
N RaihaniPsychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
V BellSocial and Cultural Neuroscience Research Group, Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
M A MehtaSocial and Cultural Neuroscience Research Group, Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R020817/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sensitization model suggests that paranoia is explained by over-sensitivity to social threat. However, this has been difficult to test experimentally. We report two preregistered social interaction studies that tested (i) whether paranoia predicted overall attribution and peak attribution of harmful intent and (ii) whether anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity and worry predicted the attribution of harmful intent. In Study 1, we recruited a large general population sample (

Indexed as

interpersonal sensitivityparanoiapsychosissocial inference

Identifiers

PMID32269791
PMCPMC7137981

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.