2008
DOI: 10.1348/147608308x297096
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Delusions and hallucinations in students compared to the general population

Abstract: The Peters Delusions Inventory and the Launay-Slade Hallucination Scale were used to assess psychotic experiences in the population (N=359) and in students (N=78). Students revealed more delusional beliefs and more distress and preoccupation associated with beliefs than persons from the general population. The differences disappeared when samples were matched for age.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
1
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
(21 reference statements)
0
19
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, we had no chance to conduct a follow‐up in order to further evaluate people identified as being at potential (psychometric) risk with a detailed interview for clinical risk stratification (eg with dedicated tools such as SIPS/SOPS, CAARMS or SPI‐A) (Schultze‐Lutter et al, ) Moreover, since participants were undergraduates still attending university courses, it is unlikely that they had a full‐blown episode of psychosis at the time of the study. Although they might be not representative of the general population, college students are generally in an age range when the risk of developing psychosis is at its highest, and they may be more forthcoming in providing answers on socially undesirable topics, such as symptoms of psychopathology (Lincoln & Keller, ). Needless to say, to further corroborate the relevance of AS for the progression of psychosis and the characterization of early at‐risk states, a field test on young help seekers in community mental health services is clearly warranted.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, we had no chance to conduct a follow‐up in order to further evaluate people identified as being at potential (psychometric) risk with a detailed interview for clinical risk stratification (eg with dedicated tools such as SIPS/SOPS, CAARMS or SPI‐A) (Schultze‐Lutter et al, ) Moreover, since participants were undergraduates still attending university courses, it is unlikely that they had a full‐blown episode of psychosis at the time of the study. Although they might be not representative of the general population, college students are generally in an age range when the risk of developing psychosis is at its highest, and they may be more forthcoming in providing answers on socially undesirable topics, such as symptoms of psychopathology (Lincoln & Keller, ). Needless to say, to further corroborate the relevance of AS for the progression of psychosis and the characterization of early at‐risk states, a field test on young help seekers in community mental health services is clearly warranted.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, generalizability is limited and one can expect restriction of variance of persecutory ideation. However, it has been demonstrated that students do not substantially differ from the general population in their level of delusion proneness if matched for demographic variables (Lincoln & Keller, 2008). Furthermore, it can be argued that the validity of the group classification based on results obtained in self-report measures is questionable and an interview would have resulted in more valid classifications.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, students are one population that may experience higher levels of psychotic like experiences such as paranoia (Lincoln and Keller, 2008) suggesting that this is a useful population to study psychotic experiences in. The gender ratio of the sample was skewed with the majority of the sample being females.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%