projects

PhD projects

Rikke Eriksen (FL project)

Energy drink consumption is a staggering 1/3 of that of bottled water in Norway (Statista.com). These drinks generally contain caffeine, artificial sweeteners (zero calorie drinks) and/or a high concentration of sugar (glucose/sucrose/fructose). Consumers are mainly young adults who may believe that this kind of drink improves their grades. There is mixed support regarding the ability of caffeine and glucose to improve cognitive performance. Less is known about the effect of these substances on cognitive effort. On the one hand, caffeine might be beneficial for those low in intrinsic motivation but might have no impact on effort spent among those high in intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, caffeine may improve cognitive performance but not cognitive effort whereas the opposite might hold for sugar. To investigate this puzzle, we will use the Cognitive Effort Discounting task (Westbrook et al., 2013) which measures concomitantly working memory performance and willingness to spend cognitive effort. The task will be administered after the consumption of different experimenter-designed beverages designed to mimic energy drinks but differing in caffeine and sugar content. Intrinsic motivation is assessed with the Need for Cognition scale (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982), and perceived effort is measured with the NASA task load index (Hart & Staveland, 1988)

Kristoffer Klevjer (NFR-funded)

When we are faced with a situation involving some sort of uncertainty, in which we have to make a decision, we thus have a multitude of factors influencing how we go about it. What are the possible outcomes, and how much do we care about them? How certain do we need to be before deciding? Can we reduce the uncertainty? How do we reduce it? By introspection, relying on things we already know, by thinking it through, or by sampling more external information? Or a combination of all? Do we even notice the factors affecting our felt certainty/uncertainty? In my PhD project I look at information sampling along the autism-schizophrenia continuum.

Martin Jensen Mækelæ (NFR stipend, forskerlinje)

Human rational behavior is shaped by a scissors whose two blades are the structure of task environments and the computational capabilities of the actor”. Research into decision-making and rationality often rely on a dual-process framework, which separate human thinking into two systems. System 1 or intuitive thinking consists of a set of autonomous systems that are automatic, fast, parallel, unconscious and effortless. System 2 or deliberate reasoning is slow, serial, conscious and require effort. Since deliberate reasoning is costly, relying on intuitive processes to save mental effort is a universal phenomenon in humans. Accordingly, there is a trade-off between intuitive and deliberate reasoning. Relying on intuition is in many cases sufficient and adaptive, but can also lead to irrational decisions. Our projects aim to investigate:

a) motivational factors, such as the influence of cognitive style and willingness to expend effort,

b) the effects of environmental factors such as language,

c) the underlying neural mechanisms involved in decision-making,

d) and the influence sub-optimal decision-making has on rationality.

Isabel Kreis (NFR-funded)- graduated April 2021

I am a cognitive psychologist with a strong affinity for neuroscience. I am currently investigating decision-making under uncertainty in schizophrenia and autism. I want to understand what basic mechanisms potentially contribute to formation and maintenance of various symptoms in patients as well as in people without any psychiatric diagnosis. To this end, I am combining behavioural measures with pupillometry and computational modelling to study concepts such as belief formation, processing of uncertainty, metacognition, effort investment, and working memory.

Thies Luedtke (in collaboration with UKE Hamburg, Prof Steffen Moritz) - graduated June 2021

For my PhD, we study the longitudinal course of psychotic symptoms in people with non-affective psychosis. Specifically, we examine which psychological factors contribute to subsequent changes of psychotic symptoms. In a collaboration between UiT and the University Hospital Hamburg, Germany, we aim at identifying factors that predict both worsening and improvement of symptoms. Unfortunately, relapses are very common in psychosis. Hence, knowledge about psychological precursors of deterioration could help to prevent relapse and hospitalization. Addressing precursors of psychosis represents a promising approach to reduce subsequent symptoms of psychosis indirectly and to prevent relapses.

We use the experience sampling method (ESM) to capture fluctuations of psychotic symptoms and presumed precursors of those fluctuations. Experience sampling consists of the repeated “diary-like” measurement of variables of interest in participants’ everyday life (for example, using smartphones that participants carry with them). ESM studies found a variety of micro level dynamics between different psychological precursors and subsequent symptomatic change. For example, paranoia seems to be preceded by low self-esteem and experiential avoidance (Udachina et al., 2014), worry and rumination (Hartley et al., 2014), aberrant salience (Reininghaus et al., 2016), as well as hasty decision making (Ludtke et al., 2017).

All of the aforementioned findings regarding precursors of psychotic symptoms stem from ESM studies, conducted within relatively short periods. Thus, there is still a research gap concerning how well affective and cognitive precursors predict larger scaled exacerbations or relapses. We address this research gap by conducting a long-term experience sampling study to examine if established daily-life precursors precede psychotic symptoms measured every two weeks or even psychotic relapse, measured every two months.

Additionally, we conduct a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial (EviBaS trial; Ruegg et al., 2018) evaluating a comprehensive psychological online intervention for people with psychosis. Using repeated measures throughout the intervention period, we examine if the aforementioned precursors of psychosis precede an improvement of psychotic symptoms.

References

Hartley, S., Haddock, G., Vasconcelos, E. S. D., Emsley, R., & Barrowclough, C. (2014). An experience sampling study of worry and rumination in psychosis. Psychol Med, 44(8), 1605-1614. doi:10.1017/S0033291713002080

Ludtke, T., Kriston, L., Schroder, J., Lincoln, T. M., & Moritz, S. (2017). Negative affect and a fluctuating jumping to conclusions bias predict subsequent paranoia in daily life: An online experience sampling study. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry, 56, 106-112. doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2016.08.014

Reininghaus, U., Kempton, M. J., Valmaggia, L., Craig, T. K., Garety, P., Onyejiaka, A., Gayer-Anderson, C., So, S. H., Hubbard, K., Beards, S., Dazzan, P., Pariante, C., Mondelli, V., Fisher, H. L., Mills, J. G., Viechtbauer, W., McGuire, P., van Os, J., Murray, R. M., Wykes, T., Myin-Germeys, I., & Morgan, C. (2016). Stress Sensitivity, Aberrant Salience, and Threat Anticipation in Early Psychosis: An Experience Sampling Study. Schizophr Bull, 42(3), 712-722. doi:10.1093/schbul/sbv190

Ruegg, N., Moritz, S., Berger, T., Ludtke, T., & Westermann, S. (2018). An internet-based intervention for people with psychosis (EviBaS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 102. doi:10.1186/s12888-018-1644-8

Udachina, A., Varese, F., Myin-Germeys, I., & Bentall, R. P. (2014). The role of experiential avoidance in paranoid delusions: an experience sampling study. Br J Clin Psychol, 53(4), 422-432. doi:10.1111/bjc.12054