Reasoning Biases In People With Religious Beliefs

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Investigating the 'Jumping to Conclusions' bias in people with religious beliefs

  • IRAS ID

    169743

  • Contact name

    Robel Iyassu

  • Contact email

    robel.iyassu@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    The University of Manchester, 3.53 Simon Building

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 8 months, 16 days

  • Research summary

    Psychosis is a type of mental health problem. People can hear voices and have strong beliefs that others don't share. We don't really know why this happens. Some people say there is a thinking style which is common in delusions. It involves ‘jumping to conclusions’ (JTC) quickly. This is common for people who are paranoid. It hasn't been studied much in people with other types of beliefs in psychosis.

    This study aims to look at JTC in people with psychosis who specifically have religious beliefs. This is often called a religious delusion. We want to see if people with religious delusions show JTC like those with paranoia. We also want to study people who are religious without psychosis to see if they show JTC.

    We will study this in a computer test. It will show pictures of two jars, both full of beads. Each jar will have beads with two colours. In one jar, most of the beads will be blue but a small number will be red. In the other jar, most will be red and a small number will be blue. We will show the two jars with the beads and then hide them. Next, the computer will show one bead on the screen in a certain colour (for example a red bead). We will then ask people to choose which jar the bead came from. When people chose a jar after only seeing one bead it is called jumping to conclusions. This task can test how much more evidence people ask for before making their decision.

  • REC name

    Yorkshire & The Humber - Sheffield Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    15/YH/0236

  • Date of REC Opinion

    26 May 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion