Cited by 85Hallucinations in medical conditionsSchizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and Psychiatry

Interpersonal Processes and Hearing Voices: A Study of the Association Between Relating to Voices and Distress in Clinical and Non-Clinical Hearers

Sorrell, Eleanor, Hayward, Mark, Meddings, Sara·2010·Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

Abstract

Background: Previous research suggests that the distress experienced by clinical voice hearers is associated with the perceived relationship between voice and hearer, independent of beliefs about voices and depression. Aims: This study aimed to replicate these findings and generate further hypotheses by comparing the voice hearing experiences of clinical and non-clinical hearers. Method: A cross-sectional, quantitative design was employed and used between-subjects and correlational methods. Thirty-two clinical voice hearers and 18 non-clinical voice hearers were assessed using the PSYRATS, the Voice and You questionnaire, the Beliefs About Voices Questionnaire – Revised, and the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Results: For clinical voice hearers, distress was significantly associated with perceptions of the voice as dominating and intrusive, and hearers distancing themselves from the voice. However, these associations were not independent of beliefs about voices’ omnipotence or malevolence. Non-clinical voice hearers were significantly less distressed than clinical voice hearers and voices were perceived as less dominant, intrusive, malevolent and omnipotent. Non-clinical hearers were found to relate from a position of less distance to voices perceived as benevolent. Conclusions: Findings from previous research were only partially replicated. Clinically, the development of less maladaptive relationships between voice and voice hearer may reduce distress.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1352465809990506

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • In cases of feelings of inferiority and defectiveness concerning the self, this is mirrored in the voice being experienced as powerful, dominant, harming, and intrusive.

    “for instance, in case of feelings of inferiority and defectiveness concerning the self, this is mirrored in the voice being experienced as powerful, dominant, harming, and intrusive [52].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sorrell, E., Hayward, M., & Meddings, S.
Affiliations
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Hayward, Mark
Venue
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Published
2009-11-02
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
127-140
ISSN
  • 1352-4658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1833
OpenAlex
W2110774672
Cited by
85
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
voice hearing, interpersonal processes, distress, replication
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Attitude, Cross-Sectional Studies, Culture, Depressive Disorder, Female, Hallucinations, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotic Disorders, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Observer Variation, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Young Adult

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