Cited by 138Schizophrenia research and treatmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Research Topics

An experience sampling study of worry and rumination in psychosis

Hartley, S., Haddock, G., Vasconcelos e Sa, D., Emsley, R., Barrowclough, C.·2014·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: Increasing research effort is being dedicated to investigating the links between emotional processes and psychosis, despite the traditional demarcation between the two. Particular focus has alighted upon two specific anxious and depressive processes, worry and rumination, given the potential for links with aspects of delusions and auditory hallucinations. This study rigorously explored the nature of these links in the context of the daily life of people currently experiencing psychosis. Method: Experience sampling methodology (ESM) was used to assess the momentary links between worry and rumination on the one hand, and persecutory delusional ideation and auditory hallucinations on the other. Twenty-seven participants completed the 6-day experience sampling period, which required repeated self-reports on thought processes and experiences. Multilevel modelling was used to examine the links within the clustered data. Results: We found that antecedent worry and rumination predicted delusional and hallucinatory experience, and the distress they elicited. Using interaction terms, we have shown that the links with momentary symptom severity were moderated by participants' trait beliefs about worry/rumination, such that they were reduced when negative beliefs about worry/rumination (meta-cognitions) were high. Conclusions: The current findings offer an ecologically valid insight into the influence of worry and rumination on the experience of psychotic symptoms, and highlight possible avenues for future intervention strategies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291713002080

Cites

55 of 55 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
Hartley, S., Haddock, G., Vasconcelos e Sa, D., Emsley, R., & Barrowclough, C.
Affiliations
  • Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB)
Corresponding author
Hartley, S.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2013-08-19
Volume
44
Issue
8
Pages
1605-1614
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2098977605
Cited by
138
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
5.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Programme Grants for Applied Research
  • National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
psychosis, worry, rumination, persecutory delusions, auditory hallucinations, metacognition, delusional ideation, distress
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety, Delusions, Depression, Female, Hallucinations, Humans, Male, Psychotic Disorders

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