IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1010326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The computational relationship between reinforcement learning, social inference, and paranoia

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph M Barnby
  • Mitul A Mehta
  • Michael Moutoussis

Abstract

Theoretical accounts suggest heightened uncertainty about the state of the world underpin aberrant belief updates, which in turn increase the risk of developing a persecutory delusion. However, this raises the question as to how an agent’s uncertainty may relate to the precise phenomenology of paranoia, as opposed to other qualitatively different forms of belief. We tested whether the same population (n = 693) responded similarly to non-social and social contingency changes in a probabilistic reversal learning task and a modified repeated reversal Dictator game, and the impact of paranoia on both. We fitted computational models that included closely related parameters that quantified the rigidity across contingency reversals and the uncertainty about the environment/partner. Consistent with prior work we show that paranoia was associated with uncertainty around a partner’s behavioural policy and rigidity in harmful intent attributions in the social task. In the non-social task we found that pre-existing paranoia was associated with larger decision temperatures and commitment to suboptimal cards. We show relationships between decision temperature in the non-social task and priors over harmful intent attributions and uncertainty over beliefs about partners in the social task. Our results converge across both classes of model, suggesting paranoia is associated with a general uncertainty over the state of the world (and agents within it) that takes longer to resolve, although we demonstrate that this uncertainty is expressed asymmetrically in social contexts. Our model and data allow the representation of sociocognitive mechanisms that explain persecutory delusions and provide testable, phenomenologically relevant predictions for causal experiments.Author summary: Responding to shifts in inanimate and social environments is important for adaptation and appropriate communication. Studies have demonstrated generic cognitive distortions to the processing of information in shifting contexts to underpin or accompany the development of symptoms of severe mental disorders, such as persecutory delusions. However, given the clear social phenomenology and clinical needs regarding social function which accompany persecutory delusions, explanations that detail how changes in generic cognition dovetail with social cognition are urgently needed. We addressed this gap by measuring the relationship between computational mechanisms governing non-social decision making and social inferences upon reversal of task contingencies, and the impact of pre-existing paranoia. We found that paranoia was related to uncertainty in both non-social and social contexts, and crucially, increased non-social uncertainty was related to changes in sociocognitive parameters. Paranoia was related to context-dependent, asymmetric biases in prior beliefs and belief-updating in social contexts. Importantly, paranoia increased the propensity to explain behaviour shifting away from beliefs about harm intent through alternative attributions. Our model and data bridges non-social and social theory explaining persecutory delusions and provides a mechanistic, phenomenologically relevant framework for causal experiments.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph M Barnby & Mitul A Mehta & Michael Moutoussis, 2022. "The computational relationship between reinforcement learning, social inference, and paranoia," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-26, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1010326
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010326
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010326&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010326?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Payam Piray & Amir Dezfouli & Tom Heskes & Michael J Frank & Nathaniel D Daw, 2019. "Hierarchical Bayesian inference for concurrent model fitting and comparison for group studies," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-34, June.
    2. Nichola J Raihani & Ruth Mace & Shakti Lamba, 2013. "The Effect of $1, $5 and $10 Stakes in an Online Dictator Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-1, August.
    3. Katherine Newman-Taylor & Thomas Richardson & Monica Sood & Mat Sopp & Emma Perry & Helen Bolderston, 2020. "Cognitive mechanisms in cannabis-related paranoia; Initial testing and model proposal," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 314-327, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1413-1438 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jacqueline N. Zadelaar & Joost A. Agelink van Rentergem & Jessica V. Schaaf & Tycho J. Dekkers & Nathalie de Vent & Laura M. S. Dekkers & Maria C. Olthof & Brenda R. J. Jansen & Hilde M. Huizenga, 2021. "Development of decision making based on internal and external information: A hierarchical Bayesian approach," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(6), pages 1413-1438, November.
    3. Payam Piray & Nathaniel D Daw, 2020. "A simple model for learning in volatile environments," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-26, July.
    4. Larney, Andrea & Rotella, Amanda & Barclay, Pat, 2019. "Stake size effects in ultimatum game and dictator game offers: A meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 61-72.
    5. Anna Hochleitner, 2022. "Fairness in times of crisis: Negative shocks, relative income and preferences for redistribution," Discussion Papers 2022-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    6. Akihiro Nishi & Nicholas A Christakis & David G Rand, 2017. "Cooperation, decision time, and culture: Online experiments with American and Indian participants," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-9, February.
    7. repec:osf:osfxxx:aw9fm_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Mostafa Shahen & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "How do individuals behave in the intergenerational sustainability dilemma? A strategy method experiment," Working Papers SDES-2020-1, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised May 2020.
    9. Antinyan, Armenak & Corazzini, Luca & Fišar, Miloš & Reggiani, Tommaso, 2024. "Mind the framing when studying social preferences in the domain of losses," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 599-612.
    10. Rahwan, Zoe & Hauser, Oliver P. & Kochanowska, Ewa & Fasolo, Barbara, 2018. "High stakes: A little more cheating, a lot less charity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 276-295.
    11. Mostafa Shahen & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Does perspective-taking promote intergenerational sustainability?," Working Papers SDES-2020-12, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Sep 2020.
    12. Emin Karagözoğlu & Ümit Barış Urhan, 2017. "The Effect of Stake Size in Experimental Bargaining and Distribution Games: A Survey," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 285-325, March.
    13. Jonathan E Bone & Katherine McAuliffe & Nichola J Raihani, 2016. "Exploring the Motivations for Punishment: Framing and Country-Level Effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, August.
    14. Caroline J. Charpentier & Qianying Wu & Seokyoung Min & Weilun Ding & Jeffrey Cockburn & John P. O’Doherty, 2024. "Heterogeneity in strategy use during arbitration between experiential and observational learning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Nichola J Raihani & Katherine McAuliffe, 2014. "Dictator Game Giving: The Importance of Descriptive versus Injunctive Norms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-17, December.
    16. Abel, Martin & Byker, Tanya & Carpenter, Jeffrey, 2021. "Socially optimal mistakes? debiasing COVID-19 mortality risk perceptions and prosocial behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 456-480.
    17. Luke Lillehaugen & Porter Ludwig & Robert L. Mayo, 2023. "Demographic differences in the effect of price on giving in a diverse population," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 157-175, December.
    18. Fourati, Maleke, 2018. "Envy and the Islamic revival: Experimental evidence from Tunisia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 1194-1214.
    19. Tatia Buidze & Tobias Sommer & Ke Zhao & Xiaolan Fu & Jan Gläscher, 2025. "Expectation violations signal goals in novel human communication," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-16, December.
    20. Ashley Harrell, 2021. "How can I help you? Multiple resource availability promotes generosity with low-value (but not high-value) resources," Rationality and Society, , vol. 33(3), pages 341-362, August.
    21. Vranka, Marek & Houdek, Petr, 2024. "Moral hypocrisy and the dichotomy of hypothetical versus real choices in prosocial behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    22. Johannes Algermissen & Jennifer C. Swart & René Scheeringa & Roshan Cools & Hanneke E. M. den Ouden, 2024. "Prefrontal signals precede striatal signals for biased credit assignment in motivational learning biases," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1010326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.