Back

Factor Analysing Predictive Processing: No Evidence for a General Factor Across Tasks

Miller-Silva, C.; Knolle, F.; Greve, A.; de Beer, F.; Mujirishvili, T.; MacGregor, L. J.; Corlett, P. R.; Haarsma, J.; Powers, A. R.; Murray, G. K.

2026-06-18 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.64898/2026.06.09.26354804 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background & Hypothesis: Dysfunctional predictive processing (PP), specifically the aberrant weighting of priors, is a frequently-proposed mechanism for psychosis and psychosis-like phenomena (schizotypy). Evidence for this theory mostly originates from single-task studies, which assume that all tasks load onto a single latent construct of PP performance, but the underlying factor structure of PP tasks is unknown. PP deficits in psychosis may be better described by a two-factor, hierarchical model: weakened lower-level (perceptual) priors compensated by higher-level (cognitive) priors. Study Design: This study implements a multi-paradigm approach in healthy participants to investigate latent constructs underlying PP and their relationship to schizotypy. Participants (N = 73) completed 6 tasks measuring reliance on priors across language, memory, visual, and auditory domains. A factor analysis investigated whether performance across tasks is captured by a single or two-factor model. Study Results: Although a two-factor model best described performance, factors reflected within-task correlations rather than a PP hierarchy. Cross-task PP measures were poorly correlated, suggesting that individuals' weighting of priors was task-specific. A full model including all task outcomes (not factors) significantly predicted the severity of schizotypal aberrant beliefs but no other schizotypal measures. Conclusions: These results do not evidence a single factor underpinning PP performance. It is therefore inappropriate to use results from single tasks to propose a generalised PP deficit in psychosis. Variation was also not captured by a two-factor hierarchical model of priors. Further multi-paradigm research is required to evaluate alternative models or additional variables that describe aberrant PP in psychosis.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Psychological Medicine
88 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
30.6%
2
Schizophrenia Bulletin
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
3
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging
71 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.3%
4
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.5%
5
BMC Psychiatry
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.2%
6
Schizophrenia Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
Cortex
119 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.2%
8
Computational Psychiatry
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
9
Schizophrenia
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
10
Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
11
Biological Psychiatry
137 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
12
Translational Psychiatry
260 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
13
Neuropsychologia
85 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
14
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.5%
15
Molecular Psychiatry
282 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
16
Psychiatry Research
41 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.1%
17
Psychophysiology
77 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.1%
18
NeuroImage: Clinical
144 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Behavioural Brain Research
77 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
20
The British Journal of Psychiatry
23 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
21
Journal of Psychiatric Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
22
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
48 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
23
BJPsych Open
29 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
24
Brain and Behavior
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
25
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
26
European Neuropsychopharmacology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
27
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.8%
28
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
29
Microbiology
65 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
30
Psychopharmacology
69 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%