Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a sparse hierarchical Bayesian model to infer mental health-related psychometric variables from neural and behavioral data obtained during Implicit Association Tests (IATs). The model generalizes the standard D-score method by incorporating multi-modal data and trainable parameters, achieving AUCs of 0.73 and 0.76 for suicidality and psychosis-related IATs, respectively. While confidence intervals are wide and results are marginally significant after FDR correction, the approach demonstrates improved accuracy compared to D-scores and comparable performance to state-of-the-art methods.
Ditch the D-score: a new Bayesian model boosts IAT accuracy for mental health assessments, rivaling complex methods without task-specific tuning.
Objective. We establish a principled method for inferring mental health related psychometric variables from neural and behavioral data using the Implicit Association Test (IAT) as the data generation engine, aiming to overcome the limited predictive performance (typically under 0.7 AUC) of the gold-standard D-score method, which relies solely on reaction times. Approach. We propose a sparse hierarchical Bayesian model that leverages multi-modal data to predict experiences related to mental illness symptoms in new participants. The model is a multivariate generalization of the D-score with trainable parameters, engineered for parameter efficiency in the small-cohort regime typical of IAT studies. Data from two IAT variants were analyzed: a suicidality-related E-IAT ($n=39$) and a psychosis-related PSY-IAT ($n=34$). Main Results. Our approach overcomes a high inter-individual variability and low within-session effect size in the dataset, reaching AUCs of 0.73 (E-IAT) and 0.76 (PSY-IAT) in the best modality configurations, though corrected 95% confidence intervals are wide ($\pm 0.18$) and results are marginally significant after FDR correction ($q=0.10$). Restricting the E-IAT to MDD participants improves AUC to 0.79 $[0.62, 0.97]$ (significant at $q=0.05$). Performance is on par with the best reference methods (shrinkage LDA and EEGNet) for each task, even when the latter were adapted to the task, while the proposed method was not. Accuracy was substantially above near-chance D-scores (0.50-0.53 AUC) in both tasks, with more consistent cross-task performance than any single reference method. Significance. Our framework shows promise for enhancing IAT-based assessment of experiences related to entrapment and psychosis, and potentially other mental health conditions, though further validation on larger and independent cohorts will be needed to establish clinical utility.
