The paranoia as defence model of persecutory delusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Murphy, Philip; Bentall, Richard P.; Freeman, Daniel; O’Rourke, Suzanne; Hutton, Paul

doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(18)30339-0

Cited by 56 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(64 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perhaps the most surprising finding is a negative one: paranoia was not directly related to self-esteem in any of the three networks. Hence, although there has been consistent evidence supporting the role of self-esteem in paranoia from previous studies (Kesting and Lincoln, 2013;Murphy et al, 2018), the current findings do not replicate this effect and therefore call into question psychological models which afford self-esteem a central role, for example the attributional model of paranoia proposed by Bentall et al (2001). Several explanations could account for this unexpected lack of association, other than the possibility that it does not, in fact, exist.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 97%

“…Paranoia has been defined as "unfounded thoughts that others are deliberately intending to cause harm" (Murphy et al, 2018). Though traditionally linked to schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders (Jorgensen and Jensen, 1994;Bentall et al, 2001), paranoid beliefs are common in the general population (Freeman, 2006) and exist on a continuum (Elahi et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Supporting Freeman's proposal, some authors have evidenced that people with paranoid beliefs exhibited lower self-esteem than those without such beliefs (Kesting and Lincoln, 2013). On the other hand, although some predictions of the defense model are not supported (i.e., explicit self-esteem preserved), a recent meta-analysis has revealed that, based on studies relying on experience sampling methodology (ESM, an intensive longitudinal research methodology that involves asking participants to report on their thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and/ or environment on multiple occasions over time), instability of self-esteem is clearly associated with increased severity of paranoia (Murphy et al, 2018). Uncertainty thus remains regarding the precise role of self-esteem in paranoia.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Temporal Network Approach to Paranoia: A Pilot Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paranoid beliefs have been conceptualized as a central psychological process linked to schizophrenia and many mental disorders. Research on paranoia has indicated that it is pivotal to consider not only levels but also dynamic aspects of incriminated related mechanisms over time. In the present study, we conceptualized paranoia as a system of interacting elements. To do so, we used temporal network analysis to unfold the temporal dynamics between core psychological paranoia-related mechanisms, such as self-esteem, sadness, feeling close to others, and experiential avoidance. Time-series data of 23 participants with high scores in paranoia and/or interpersonal sensitivity were collected via experience sampling methodology (ESM). We applied a multilevel vector autoregressive (mlVAR) model approach and computed three distinct and complementary network models (i.e., contemporaneous, temporal, and between-subject) to disentangle associations between paranoia-related mechanisms in three different time frames. The contemporaneous model indicated that paranoia and sadness co-occurred within the same time frame, while sadness was associated with both low self-esteem and lack of closeness to others. The temporal model highlighted the importance of feeling close to others in predicting low paranoia levels in the next time frame. Finally, the between-subject model largely replicated an association found in both contemporaneous and temporal models. The current study reveals that the network approach offers a viable data-driven methodology for elucidating how paranoia-related mechanisms fluctuate over time and may determine its severity. Moreover, this novel perspective may open up new directions toward identifying potential targets for prevention and treatment of paranoia-related problems.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Temporal Network Approach to Paranoia: A Pilot Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interpersonal 32 cognitive biases also affect how individuals interpret social situations. The most 33 established effect is that those with paranoid beliefs have an externalising attribution 34 bias, whereby causes of negative events are more likely to be attributed to other 35 people (15). Trait interpersonal sensitivity has also been associated with paranoid 36…”

Section: Background 22mentioning

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

“…Interpersonal cognitive biases also affect how individuals interpret social situations. The most established effect is that those with paranoid beliefs have an externalizing attribution bias, whereby causes of negative events are more likely to be attributed to other people [14]. Trait interpersonal sensitivity has also been associated with paranoid thinking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sensitization model suggests that paranoia is explained by over-sensitivity to social threat. However, this has been difficult to test experimentally. We report two preregistered social interaction studies that tested (i) whether paranoia predicted overall attribution and peak attribution of harmful intent and (ii) whether anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity and worry predicted the attribution of harmful intent. In Study 1, we recruited a large general population sample (N = 987) who serially interacted with other participants in multi-round dictator games and matched to fair, partially fair or unfair partners. Participants rated attributions of harmful intent and self-interest after each interaction. In Study 2 (N = 1011), a new sample of participants completed the same procedure and additionally completed measures of anxiety, worry and interpersonal sensitivity. As predicted, prior paranoid ideation was associated with higher and faster overall harmful intent attributions, whereas attributions of self-interest were unaffected, supporting the sensitization model. Contrary to predictions, neither worry, interpersonal sensitivity nor anxiety was associated with harmful intent attributions. In a third exploratory internal meta-analysis, we combined datasets to examine the effect of paranoia on trialby-trial attributional changes when playing fair and unfair dictators. Paranoia was associated with a greater reduction in harmful intent attributions when playing a fair but not unfair

show abstract

The paranoia as defence model of persecutory delusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 56 publications

References 49 publications

A Temporal Network Approach to Paranoia: A Pilot Study

A Temporal Network Approach to Paranoia: A Pilot Study

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

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About