This article examines the relation between mood state, severity of psychopathology, and memory in the affective disorders by reviewing the literature concerned with memory processes in depression and mania. On the basis of this review, a model is presented that tries to reconcile the varied findings encountered in the literature. Specifically, this model proposes that memory processes in these disorders result from the operation of two diagnostically nonspecific mechanisms, mood state and severity of psychopathology. Mood state is thought to affect memory in two related ways: (a) by activating a negative self-schema that is responsible for the selective encoding and retrieval of information congruent with the current state, and (b) by providing contextual cues that result in the activation of mood-state-congruent memory associations. The effect of severity of pathology is also proposed to occur via one or both of two possible routes: (a) by disrupting trace processing and storage by its disorganizational nature, and/or (b) by producing low levels of effort in encoding and storage.

The paranoid has traditionally been considered schizophrenic except for some rare cases which exhibit delusions but none of the other signs such as cognitive disorganization. We attempt to show that considering the paranoid as independent of schizophrenia and exhibiting varying degrees of pathology is more consistent with current research. Furthermore, we believe that there is enough description of the underlying cognitive process unique to the paranoid and distinct from the schizophrenic to warrant a separate inclusive category, and possibly the consideration of a particular personality, at least in terms of cognitive processes. We review the research in information processing and hemispheric functioning to demonstrate distinctive cognitive processing, and finally, we offer a higher order integration construct to explain the etiology of schizophrenia and paranoia in terms of thought processes.

Two tests of creativity were given to 10 paranoid and 10 nonparanoid schizophrenics, 10 nonpsychotic psychiatric controls, and 10 normal subjects. Scores on vocabulary and similarities tests, as well as education, medication, marital status, socioeconomic background, and age, were examined. Results indicated that nonparanoid schizophrenics were significantly more creative than paranoids and psychiatric controls on one creativity measure, a graded level measure of the Alternate Uses Test. Also, nonparanoid schizophrenics produced a significantly higher percentage of "highly creative" responses than did the normals. Nonparanoid schizophrenics also scored higher than the other groups on the Barren-Welsh Figure Preference Test, but this finding was found to be related to age rather than to schizophrenia. The superior performance of the nonparanoid schizophrenic is discussed in terms of the encouragement that a supportive, nonjudgmental testing environment provides. Also, the possible equivalence of creativity and schizophrenia is discussed, and the hypothesis that the two may reflect similar cognitive processes is offered.

The Maine Scale was examined in three separate studies using hospitalized psychiatric patients in which adequate test-retest and independent interrater reliabilities were obtained. In an examination of construct validity, high scores on the nonparanoid subscale were associated with external locus of control; poor performance on Stanford-Binet vocabulary, the Expanded Similarities, and the Embedded Figures tests; conceptual overinclusion; slow reaction time; deviant word associations; and poor recall of word associations. Scores on the paranoid subscale did not correlate with any of the performance measures. In an examination of concurrent validity, the Maine Scale paranoid and nonparanoid subscales correlated significantly with the corresponding subscales of the Symptom Rating Scale and the Symptom-Sign Inventory. The Maine Scale subscales also correlated significantly with the Weighted Symptom-Sign Inventory and the New Haven Schizophrenia Index but were better able to discriminate between paranoid and schizophrenic categories than any of the other scales. Factor analyses showed a schizophrenic and paranoid factor in both studies. Reliability is discussed in relation to other diagnostic procedures, and suggestions are included for the use of the Maine Scale for research purposes.

The possibility that schizophrenia and creativity are two aspects of the same process is discussed, and parallels between different types of schizophrenia and different factors of creativity are sought. The discussion begins at a theoretical level,but its main thrust is an analysis of the research literature at an empirical level. Similarities are pointed out between tasks used for the purpose of operationally defining the schizophrenic 'deficit' and tasks used to define creativity. Some evidence is found for different subtypes of schizophrenics exhibiting different factors or types of creativity.