ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2023
Testing Bayesian models of belief updating in the context of depressive symptomatology.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating Sensorimotor Decision-Making in Depressed Individuals Using a Bayesian Approach.Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- How mood shapes belief updating bias in depression.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Review
- Does disconfirmatory evidence shape safety-and danger-related beliefs of trauma-exposed individuals?European journal of psychotraumatology · 2024Article
- Testing Bayesian models of belief updating in the context of depressive symptomatology.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPredictive processing approaches to belief updating in depression propose that depression is related to more negative and more precise priors. Also, belief updating is assumed be negatively biased in comparison to normative Bayesian updating. There is a lack of efficient methods to mathematically model belief updating in depression.
methodsWe validated a novel performance belief updating paradigm in a nonclinical sample (N = 133). Participants repeatedly participated in a non-self-related emotion recognition task and received false feedback. Effects of the feedback manipulation and differences in depressive symptoms on belief updating were analysed in Bayesian multilevel analyses.
resultsBeliefs were successfully manipulated through the feedback provided. Depressive symptoms were associated with more negative updating than normative Bayesian updating but results were influenced by few cases. No evidence of biased change in beliefs or overly precise priors was found. Depressive symptoms were associated with more negative updating of generalised performance beliefs.
conclusionsThere was cautious support for negatively biased belief updating associated with depressive symptoms, especially for generalised beliefs. The content of the task may not be self-relevant enough to cause strong biases. Further explication of Bayesian models of depression and replication in clinical samples is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.