Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Learning involves reducing the uncertainty of incoming information-does it reflect meaningful change (volatility) or random noise? Normative accounts of learning capture the interconnectedness of this uncertainty: learning increases when changes are perceived as meaningful (volatility) and reduces when changes are seen as noise. Misestimating uncertainty-especially volatility-may contribute to psychotic symptoms, yet studies often overlook the interdependence of noise. We developed a block-design task that manipulated both noise and volatility using inputs from ground-truth distributions, with incentivised trial-wise estimates. Across three general population samples (online Ns = 580/147; in-person N = 19), participants showed normative learning overall. However, psychometric schizotypy and delusional ideation were linked to non-normative patterns. Paranoia was associated with poorer performance and reduced insight. All traits showed inflexible adaptation to changing uncertainty. Computational modelling suggested that non-normative learning may reflect difficulties inferring noise. This could lead one to misinterpret randomness as meaningful. Capturing joint uncertainty estimation offers insights into psychosis and supports clinically relevant computational phenotyping.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1038/s44184-025-00146-6

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2025-08-31T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

4