Cited by 17Schizophrenia research and treatmentChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentPsychology and Mental Health

A preliminary investigation of schematic beliefs and unusual experiences in children

Open access
Noone, D., Ames, C., Hassanali, N., Browning, S., Bracegirdle, K., Corrigall, R., Laurens, K.R., Hirsch, C.R. +4 more·2015·European Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: In cognitive models of adult psychosis, schematic beliefs about the self and others are important vulnerability and maintaining factors, and are therefore targets for psychological interventions. Schematic beliefs have not previously been investigated in children with distressing unusual, or psychotic-like, experiences (UEDs). The aim of this study was firstly to investigate whether a measure of schematic beliefs, originally designed for adults with psychosis, was suitable for children; and secondly, to examine the association of childhood schematic beliefs with internalising and externalising problems and with UEDs. Method: Sixty-seven children aged 8–14 years, with emotional and behavioural difficulties, completed measures of UEDs, internalising (depression and anxiety), and externalising (conduct and hyperactivity-inattention) problems, together with the Brief Core Schema Scales (BCSS). Results: The BCSS was readily completed by participants, and scale psychometric properties were good. Children tended to view themselves and others positively. Internalising and externalising problems and UEDs were all associated with negative schematic beliefs; effect sizes were small to medium. Conclusions: Schematic beliefs in young people can be measured using the BCSS, and negative schematic beliefs are associated with childhood psychopathology and with UEDs. Schematic beliefs may therefore form a useful target in psychological interventions for young people with UEDs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2014.12.006

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Distress impacts self-knowledge and cognitive biases at the trait level, including negative childhood self-beliefs such as being helpless or unloved.

    “Distress is also known to impact self-knowledge and cognitive biases at the trait level, for instance in the development of negative beliefs about the self in childhood such as “I am helpless” or “I am unloved” (Dozois et al., 2012; Noone et al., 2015)—beliefs which have also been linked to psychotic-like experiences (Cowan, McAdams, et al., 2019; Noone et al., 2015).”

    From Narrative identity in the psychosis spectrum: A systematic review and developmental model (2021) · cites this paper as Noone et al., 2015

    The Abstract reports that negative schematic beliefs in children were associated with internalising problems and distressing unusual experiences. It does not establish that distress causes those beliefs to develop or affects self-knowledge and cognitive biases at the trait level; the retrieved passages also do not give the examples “I am helpless” or “I am unloved.” (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Noone, D., Ames, C., Hassanali, N., Browning, S., Bracegirdle, K., Corrigall, R., Laurens, K. R., Hirsch, C. R., Kuipers, E., Maddox, L., Fowler, D., & Jolley, S.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Jolley, S.
Venue
European Psychiatry
Published
2015-07
Volume
30
Issue
5
Pages
569-575
ISSN
  • 0924-9338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1778-3585
OpenAlex
W2140954994
Cited by
17
References
5
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 4
FWCI
3.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Guy's and St Thomas’ Charity (R100417)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
Keywords
unusual experiences, psychotic-like experiences, children, internalizing problems, externalizing problems, emotional and behavioral problems, psychopathology
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Adult, Child, Child Behavior, Child Development, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Psychometrics, Psychotic Disorders, Risk Assessment, Adolescent Development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review