
pmid: 29602712
Researchers in the field of computational psychiatry have recently sought to model the formation and retention of delusions in terms of dysfunctions in a process of hierarchical Bayesian inference. I present a systematic review of such models and raise two challenges that have not received sufficient attention in the literature. First, the characteristic that is supposed to most sharply distinguish hierarchical Bayesian models from their competitors is their abandonment of the distinction between perception and cognition in favour of a unified inferential hierarchy. Standard ways of characterising this hierarchy, however, are inconsistent with the range of phenomena that delusions can represent. Second, there is little evidence that belief fixation in the healthy population is Bayesian, and an apparent abundance of evidence that it is not. As such, attempts to model delusions in terms of dysfunctions in a process of Bayesian inference are of dubious theoretical value.
Predictive coding, Optimality, Predictive processing, Bayes Theorem, Motivated reasoning, Two-factor, Models, Theoretical, Psychosis, Rationality, Delusions, Confirmation bias, Backfire effect, Humans, Bayesian just-so stories, Argumentative theory of reasoning, Bayesian brain hypothesis
Predictive coding, Optimality, Predictive processing, Bayes Theorem, Motivated reasoning, Two-factor, Models, Theoretical, Psychosis, Rationality, Delusions, Confirmation bias, Backfire effect, Humans, Bayesian just-so stories, Argumentative theory of reasoning, Bayesian brain hypothesis
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 41 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
