Neural correlates of wishful thinking.

Wishful thinking (WT) implies the overestimation of the likelihood of desirable events. It occurs for outcomes of personal interest, but also for events of interest to others we like. We investigated whether WT is grounded on low-level selective attention or on higher level cognitive processes including differential weighting of evidence or response formation. Participants in our MRI study predicted the likelihood that their favorite or least favorite team would win a football game. Consistent with expectations, favorite team trials were characterized by higher winning odds. Our data demonstrated activity in a cluster comprising parts of the left inferior occipital and fusiform gyri to distinguish between favorite and least favorite team trials. More importantly, functional connectivities of this cluster with the human reward system were specifically involved in the type of WT investigated in our study, thus supporting the idea of an attention bias generating WT. Prefrontal cortex activity also distinguished between the two teams. However, activity in this region and its functional connectivities with the human reward system were altogether unrelated to the degree of WT reflected in the participants' behavior and may rather be related to social identification, ensuring the affective context necessary for WT to arise.

Prior knowledge of the clinical picture does not introduce bias in the histopathologic diagnosis of melanocytic skin lesions

A common debate among dermatopathologists is that prior knowledge of the clinical picture of melanocytic skin neoplasms may introduce a potential bias in the histopathologic examination. Histologic slides from 99 melanocytic skin neoplasms were circulated among 10 clinical dermatologists, all of them formally trained and board-certified dermatopathologists: 5 dermatopathologists had clinical images available after a 'blind' examination (Group 1); the other 5 had clinical images available before microscopic examination (Group 2). Data from the two groups were compared regarding 'consensus' (a diagnosis in agreement by ≥4 dermatopathologists/group), chance-corrected interobserver agreement (Fleiss' k) and level of diagnostic confidence (LDC: a 1-5 arbitrary scale indicating 'increasing reliability' of any given diagnosis). Compared with Group 1 dermatopathologists, Group 2 achieved a lower number of consensus (84 vs. 90) but a higher k value (0.74 vs. 0.69) and a greater mean LDC value (4.57 vs. 4.32). The same consensus was achieved by the two groups in 81/99 cases. Spitzoid neoplasms were most frequently controversial for both groups. The histopathologic interpretation of melanocytic neoplasms seems to be not biased by the knowledge of the clinical picture before histopathologic examination.