Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 803

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Omnipotence of Voices: A Cognitive Approach to Auditory Hallucinations

Chadwick, Paul, Birchwood, Max·1994·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

We offer provisional support for a new cognitive approach to understanding and treating drug-resistant auditory hallucinations in people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Study 1 emphasises the relevance of the cognitive model by detailing the behavioural, cognitive and affective responses to persistent voices in 26 patients, demonstrating that highly disparate relationships with voices - fear, reassurance, engagement and resistance - reflect vital differences in beliefs about the voices. All patients viewed their voices as omnipotent and omniscient. However, beliefs about the voice's identity and meaning led to voices being construed as either ‘benevolent’ or ‘malevolent’. Patients provided cogent reasons (evidence) for these beliefs which were not always linked to voice content; indeed in 31 % of cases beliefs were incongruous with content, as would be anticipated by a cognitive model. Without fail, voices believed to be malevolent provoked fear and were resisted and those perceived as benevolent were courted. However, in the case of imperative voices, the primary influence on whether commands were obeyed was the severity of the command. Study 2 illustrates how these core beliefs about voices may become a new target for treatment. We describe the application of an adapted version of cognitive therapy (CT) to the treatment of four patients' drug-resistant voices. Where patients were on medication, this was held constant while beliefs about the voices' omnipotence, identity, and purpose were systematically disputed and tested. Large and stable reductions in conviction in these beliefs were reported, and these were associated with reduced distress, increased adaptive behaviour, and, unexpectedly, a fall in voice activity. These changes were corroborated by the responsible psychiatrists. Collectively, the cases attest to the promise of CT as a treatment for auditory hallucinations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.164.2.190

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 1987, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
  2. 10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.209 · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.209 · Paper page
  3. Maher, 1988, Delusional Beliefs
  4. 10.1037/0022-006X.58.2.225 · DOI
  5. 10.1037/11193-000 · DOI
  6. Parkinson, 1992, Emotion
  7. Clements, 1992, Innovations in the Psychological Management of Schizophrenia
  8. Slade, 1988, Sensory Deception: A Scientific Analysis of Auditory Hallucinations.

Cited by

See all 803

Metadata

Authors
Chadwick, P., & Birchwood, M.
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
1994-02
Volume
164
Issue
2
Pages
190-201
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2164040597
Cited by
803
References
28
FWCI
22.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Omnipotence of Voices: A Cognitive Approach to Auditory Hallucinations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1192/bjp.164.2.190
The paper
Chadwick, P., & Birchwood, M. (1994). The Omnipotence of Voices: A Cognitive Approach to Auditory Hallucinations. British Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.164.2.190

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.