Psychotic-Like or Unusual Subjective Experiences? The role of certainty in the appraisal of the subclinical psychotic phenotype
Abstract
The multi-dimensional features of Unusual Subjective Experiences (USEs) may be more accurate indicators of psychosis-proneness than simple frequency count. We tested whether subjective certainty or uncertainty of the occurrence of USEs can influence perceived wellbeing. Five hundred and four undergraduate students completed measures of delusion- and hallucination-proneness, general health and emotional processing. Participants' responses on the delusion- and hallucination-proneness scales were dichotomized on the basis of their certainty level. Results showed that, USEs rated with certainty were associated with poor self-perceived health and difficult emotional processing, while those rated with uncertainty were not. Certainty of USEs was associated with increased distress and may be important in characterizing psychopathological significance. Specific characteristics associated with USEs may be more important than their frequency in predicting psychosis risk.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
One study reported that the frequency and intensity of psychotic-like experiences were higher among healthy believers in the paranormal than among healthy skeptics.
“One study reported that the frequency and intensity of psychotic-like experiences were higher among healthy believers in the paranormal than among healthy skeptics.52”
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 54 · Cited by 29
- Authors
- Preti, A., Cella, M., Raballo, A., & Vellante, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Cagliari (IT)
- King's College London (GB)
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Preti, Antonio
- Venue
- Psychiatry Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-12
- Volume
- 200
- Issue
- 2-3
- Pages
- 669-673
- ISSN
- 0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2077522632
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 2.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UNICA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Cagliari) (submittedVersion)
- Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Università degli Studi di Cagliari
- European Commission
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
- Keywords
- psychotic-like experiences, delusion proneness, hallucination proneness, psychosis risk, health perception, emotional processing, distress
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Delusions, Emotions, Female, Hallucinations, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Phenotype, Psychotic Disorders, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Uncertainty
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