A systematic review of self-report measures of paranoia.

Statham, Verity; Emerson, Lisa-Marie; Rowse, Georgina

doi:10.1037/pas0000645

Cited by 38 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The GPTS was chosen as a suitable measure as it includes both core aspects of the definition of paranoia [ 1 ]: social concerns about others and perception of intended harm. It has also shown to be the most reliable and valid scale for measuring paranoia across the clinical and non-clinical spectrum [ 37 ]. Total paranoia scores were obtained for each participant by summing the response scores to all questions, comprising both the social reference and the persecution scales.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduction in social learning and increased policy uncertainty about harmful intent is associated with pre-existing paranoid beliefs: Evidence from modelling a modified serial dictator game

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current computational models suggest that paranoia may be explained by stronger higher-order beliefs about others and increased sensitivity to environments. However, it is unclear whether this applies to social contexts, and whether it is specific to harmful intent attributions, the live expression of paranoia. We sought to fill this gap by fitting a computational model to data (n = 1754) from a modified serial dictator game, to explore whether pre-existing paranoia could be accounted by specific alterations to cognitive parameters characterising harmful intent attributions. We constructed a ‘Bayesian brain’ model of others’ intent, which we fitted to harmful intent and self-interest attributions made over 18 trials, across three different partners. We found that pre-existing paranoia was associated with greater uncertainty about other’s actions. It moderated the relationship between learning rates and harmful intent attributions, making harmful intent attributions less reliant on prior interactions. Overall, the magnitude of harmful intent attributions was directly related to their uncertainty, and importantly, the opposite was true for self-interest attributions. Our results explain how pre-existing paranoia may be the result of an increased need to attend to immediate experiences in determining intentional threat, at the expense of what is already known, and more broadly, they suggest that environments that induce greater probabilities of harmful intent attributions may also induce states of uncertainty, potentially as an adaptive mechanism to better detect threatening others. Importantly, we suggest that if paranoia were able to be explained exclusively by core domain-general alterations we would not observe differential parameter estimates underlying harmful-intent and self-interest attributions.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduction in social learning and increased policy uncertainty about harmful intent is associated with pre-existing paranoid beliefs: Evidence from modelling a modified serial dictator game

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The GPTS was chosen as a suitable 112 measure as it includes both core aspects of the definition of paranoia (1): social 113 concerns about others and perception of intended harm. It has also shown to be 114 the most reliable and valid scale for measuring paranoia across the clinical and 115 non-clinical spectrum (36). Total paranoia scores were obtained for each 116 participant by summing the response scores to all questions, comprising both the 117 social reference and the persecution scales.…”

Section: Methodology 96mentioning

confidence: 99%

Paranoia, sensitisation and social inference: findings from two large-scale, multi-round behavioural experiments.

Barnby¹,

Deeley²,

Robinson³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1The sensitisation model suggests paranoia is explained by over-sensitivity to 2 perceived threat in social environments. However, this has been difficult to test 3 experimentally. We report two pre-registered studies that tested i) the sensitisation 4 model as an explanation of paranoia, and; ii) the role of purported maintaining 5 factors in supporting social sensitisation. In study one, we recruited a large general 6 population sample (N=987) who serially interacted with other participants in multi-7round Dictator games, matched to fair, partially fair, or unfair partners. Participants 8 rated attributions of harmful intent and self-interest after each interaction. In study 9 two (N=1011), a new sample of participants completed the same procedure and 10 additionally completed measures of anxiety, worry and interpersonal sensitivity. As 11 predicted, paranoid ideation predicted higher and faster overall harmful intent 12 attributions, whereas attributions of self-interest were unaffected, supporting the 13 sensitisation model. Contrary to predictions, neither worry nor anxiety predicted 14 harmful intent attributions while interpersonal sensitivity predicted decreased harmful 15 intent attributions. In a third exploratory study we combined data sets to examine the 16 effect of paranoia on trial by trial attributional changes when playing fair and unfair 17dictators. Paranoia predicted a greater reduction in harmful intent attributions when 18 playing a fair but not unfair dictator, suggesting paranoia may also exaggerate the 19 volatility of beliefs about the harmful intent of others. 20 21

show abstract

“…Scores can range from 16 to 80; higher scores reflect greater paranoia. The scale is well validated for use in both clinical and non-clinical samples [41] and has strong concurrent validity with paranoia severity as assessed by clinical interviews and by controlled virtual reality tests [42,43]. Using item response theory analysis with over 10,000 individuals, the GPTS-B has been shown to demonstrate high reliability (a > 0.95) across both mild and severe ends of the paranoia spectrum [44].…”

Section: Oxfordshire Participant Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parenting behaviour and paranoia: a network analysis and results from the National Comorbidity Survey-Adolescents (NCS-A)

Brown

Freeman

2020

Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Parenting behaviours-including the extent to which parents are protective, hostile, or caring-likely impacts whether a child develops a sense of vulnerability that carries forward into adulthood. Ideas of vulnerability are a contributory factor to the occurrence of paranoia. Our aim was to assess whether there is an association between specific parenting behaviours and paranoia. Method We examined cross-sectional associations of parenting and paranoia in an epidemiologically representative cohort of 10,148 adolescents (National Comorbidity Survey-Adolescents; NCS-A) and a second dataset of 1286 adults in Oxfordshire. Further, a network analysis was conducted with paranoia, parenting behaviours, and cognitive-affective variables (compassion, self-esteem, anxiety, and depression). Overprotectiveness, verbal abuse, physical abuse, and amount of care were assessed in mothers and fathers separately. Results Nearly all parenting variables were significantly associated with paranoia, with parental verbal and physical abuse showing the largest associations. For example, the odds of reporting paranoia was over four times higher for those in the adult sample reporting a lot of paternal verbal abuse, compared to those reporting none (OR = 4.12, p < 0.001, CI 2.47-6.85). Network analyses revealed high interconnectivity between paranoia, parenting behaviours, and cognitive-affective variables. Of the parenting variables, paranoia most strongly interacted with paternal abuse and maternal lack of care. Conclusion There are associations between participants' self-reported experiences of parental behaviours and paranoia. Despite being associated with paranoia, cognitive-affective variables did not appear to mediate the relationship between parenting and paranoia, which is surprising. What might explain the link therefore remains to be determined.

show abstract

A systematic review of self-report measures of paranoia.

Abstract: This is a repository copy of A systematic review of self-report measures of paranoia.

Cited by 38 publications

References 86 publications

Reduction in social learning and increased policy uncertainty about harmful intent is associated with pre-existing paranoid beliefs: Evidence from modelling a modified serial dictator game

Reduction in social learning and increased policy uncertainty about harmful intent is associated with pre-existing paranoid beliefs: Evidence from modelling a modified serial dictator game

Paranoia, sensitisation and social inference: findings from two large-scale, multi-round behavioural experiments.

Parenting behaviour and paranoia: a network analysis and results from the National Comorbidity Survey-Adolescents (NCS-A)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About