A Comparison of Delusions and Overvalued Ideas
Abstract
The relationship between delusions and overvalued ideas is uncertain, and has clinical as well as conceptual implications. This study aims to compare delusions and overvalued ideas on several characteristics that might further describe and distinguish them. A total of 24 individuals with delusions and 27 with overvalued ideas were recruited from a psychiatric service and assessed using a semistructured interview. Deluded individuals were less likely to identify what might modify their belief, less preoccupied, and less concerned about others' reactions than those with overvalued ideas. Delusions were less plausible and their onset less likely to appear reasonable. Delusions were more likely to have abrupt onset and overvalued ideas a gradual onset. Conviction and insight were similar in the 2 groups. Belief conviction and insight may be an inadequate basis for separating delusions from overvalued ideas. Abrupt onset, implausible content, and relative indifference to the opinions of others may be better distinguishing features.
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?
Hippolytus' and Atalanta's belief in the Reptilian conspiracy is not a clinical delusion but an overvalued idea.
“I consider that Hippolytus' and Atalanta's belief in Reptilian conspiracy is not a delusion in a clinical sense but rather an overvalued idea.”
From The Role of Early Trauma in the Formation of Belief in Reptilian Conspiracy Theories: A Psychoanalytic Perspective (2023) · cites this paper as Mullen & Linscott, 2010
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dixon, A. M. (2023) · British Journal of Psychotherapy · doi:10.1111/bjp.12856 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mullen, R., & Linscott, R. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Otago (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Mullen, Richard
- Venue
- Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease
- Published
- 2010-01
- Volume
- 198
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 35-38
- ISSN
- 0022-3018 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1964137588
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 8.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
- Keywords
- delusions, overvalued ideas, delusional disorder, psychotic symptoms, insight, preoccupation, differential diagnosis
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Awareness, Cognition Disorders, Delusions, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Neuropsychological Tests, Paranoid Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology
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