Cited by 24Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryPersonality Traits and Psychology

Unpleasant and pleasant referential thinking: Relations with self-processing, paranoia, and other schizotypal traits

Open access
Cicero, David C., Kerns, John G.·2011·Journal of Research in Personality

Abstract

Referential thinking is the tendency to view innocuous stimuli as having a specific meaning for the self and is associated with personality traits and disorders. In three studies, this research examined the relations among referential thinking, self-processing, and paranoia. In study 1, follow-up questions on the Referential Thinking Scale (Lenzenweger, Bennett, & Lilenfeld, 1997) revealed that referential thoughts are experienced as unpleasant and pleasant. In Study 2, unpleasant referential thinking was more strongly associated with paranoia and maladaptive self-processing and personality. CFAs in Study 1 and 2 found that unpleasant and pleasant referential thinking loaded on different factors. In Study 3, a group of participants with elevated schizotypal personality reported more unpleasant and pleasant referential thoughts than a control group.

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.jrp.2011.02.002

Cites

78 of 81 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?

  • Autobiographical reflection seems to be experienced as unpleasant for individuals with trait vulnerability for psychosis.

    “The experience would likely be aversive, and in fact autobiographical reflection seems to be experienced as unpleasant for individuals with trait vulnerability for psychosis (Cicero & Kerns, 2011).”

    From Narrative identity in the psychosis spectrum: A systematic review and developmental model (2021) · cites this paper as Cicero & Kerns, 2011

    Study 3 (Results and Discussion; page not available) found that participants with elevated schizotypal traits reported more unpleasant referential thoughts than controls, supporting the claim’s point about unpleasant experiences in people with a trait vulnerability for psychosis. The paper studies referential thinking, however, not whether autobiographical reflection itself feels unpleasant. It also found elevated pleasant referential thoughts in the same group. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

2 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Hathaway SR McKinley JC Manual of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 1989 University of Minnesota Press Minneapolis, MN
  2. Livesley WJ Jackson DN Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ) 2002 Sigma Press Port Huron, MI
  3. Useda D Trull TJ The construct validity of the Paranoid Personality Disorder Features Questionnaire (PPDFQ): A dimensional assessment of paranoid personality disorder Unpublished Dissertation 2002
  4. Wing JK Cooper JE Sartorious Measurement and classification of psychiatric symptoms: An instruction manual for teh PSE and Catego Program 1974 Cambridge University Press Cambrige, England

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cicero, D. C., & Kerns, J. G.
Affiliations
University of Missouri (US)
Corresponding author
Kerns, John G.
Venue
Journal of Research in Personality
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-04
Volume
45
Issue
2
Pages
208-218
ISSN
0092-6566 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1997011269
Cited by
24
References
83
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Research in Personality (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R21AA019492)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (F31MH086190, R03MH072706)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R03DA022405)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
self-processing, paranoia, schizotypy, schizotypal personality traits, personality traits

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