In times of unexpected uncertainty,
such as the sudden appearance of a global pandemic, people may be more prone to
paranoia, Yale University researchers suggest in a new study published in the
journal eLife.
“When our world
changes unexpectedly, we want to blame that volatility on somebody, to make
sense of it, and perhaps neutralize it,” said Yale’s Philip Corlett, associate
professor of psychiatry and senior author of the study. “Historically in times
of upheaval, such as the great fire of ancient Rome in 64 C.E. or the 9/11
terrorist attacks, paranoia and conspiratorial thinking increased.”
Paranoia is a
key symptom of serious mental illness, marked by the belief that other people
have malicious intentions. But it also manifests in varying degrees in the
general population. For instance, one previous survey found that 20% of the
population believed people were against them at some time during the past year;
8% believed that others were actively out to harm them.
The prevailing
theory is that paranoia stems from an inability to accurately assess social
threats. But Corlett and lead author Erin Reed of Yale hypothesized that
paranoia is instead rooted in a more basic learning mechanism that is triggered
by uncertainty, even in the absence of social threat.
“We think of the
brain as a prediction machine; unexpected change, whether social or not, may
constitute a type of threat — it limits the brain’s ability to make
predictions,” Reed said. “Paranoia may be a response to uncertainty in general,
and social interactions can be particularly complex and difficult to predict.”
In a series of
experiments, they asked subjects with different degrees of paranoia to play a
card game in which the best choices for success were changed secretly. People
with little or no paranoia were slow to assume that the best choice had
changed. However, those with paranoia expected even more volatility in the
game. They changed their choices capriciously — even after a win. The
researchers then increased the levels of uncertainty by changing the chances of
winning halfway through the game without telling the participants. This sudden
change made even the low-paranoia participants behave like those with paranoia,
learning less from the consequences of their choices.
In a related
experiment, Yale collaborators Jane Taylor and Stephanie Groman trained rats, a
relatively asocial species, to complete a similar task where best choices of
success changed. Rats who were administered methamphetamine — known to induce
paranoia in humans — behaved just like paranoid humans. They, too, anticipated
high volatility and relied more on their expectations than learning from the
task.
Reed, Corlett
and their team then used a mathematical model to compare choices made by rats
and humans while performing these similar tasks. The results from the rats that
received methamphetamine resembled those of humans with paranoia, researchers
found.
“Our hope is
that this work will facilitate a mechanistic explanation of paranoia, a first
step in the development of new treatments that target those underlying
mechanisms,” Corlett said.
“The benefit of
seeing paranoia through a non-social lens is that we can study these mechanisms
in simpler systems, without needing to recapitulate the richness of human
social interaction,” Reed said.
Journal article: https://elifesciences.org/articles/56345
Source: https://myfusimotors.com/2020/06/12/unexpected-uncertainty-can-breed-paranoia/
No comments:
Post a Comment