Cited by 133Hallucinations in medical conditionsSchizophrenia research and treatmentPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research

The relationship between trauma and beliefs about hearing voices: a study of psychiatric and non-psychiatric voice hearers

Andrew, E. M., Gray, N. S., Snowden, R. J.·2008·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: Cognitive models suggest that distress associated with auditory hallucinations is best understood in terms of beliefs about voices. What is less clear is what factors govern such beliefs. This study aimed to explore the way in which traumatic life events contribute towards beliefs about voices and any associated distress. Method: The difference in the nature and prevalence of traumatic life events and associated psychological sequelae was compared in two groups of voice hearers: psychiatric voice hearers with predominantly negative beliefs about voices (PVH) and non-psychiatric voice hearers with predominantly positive beliefs about voices (NPVH). The data from the two groups were then combined in order to examine which factors could significantly account for the variance in beliefs about voices and therefore levels of distress. Results: Both groups reported a high prevalence of traumatic life events although significantly more PVH reported trauma symptoms sufficient for a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Furthermore, significantly more PVH reported experiencing childhood sexual abuse. Current trauma symptoms (re-experiencing, avoidance and hyperarousal) were found to be a significant predictor of beliefs about voices. Trauma variables accounted for a significant proportion of the variance in anxiety and depression. Conclusions: The results suggest that beliefs about voices may be at least partially understood in the context of traumatic life events.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s003329170700253x

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Andrew, E. M., Gray, N. S., & Snowden, R. J.
Affiliations
  • Royal Glamorgan Hospital (GB)
  • Glanrhyd Hospital (GB)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Andrew, E. M.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2008-01-04
Volume
38
Issue
10
Pages
1409-1417
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2107188102
Cited by
133
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Keywords
auditory hallucinations, voice hearing, traumatic life events, post-traumatic stress disorder, child sexual abuse, anxiety, depression
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Attitude to Health, Mental Disorders, Culture, Female, Hallucinations, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Prevalence

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