PARANOIA IN THE GENERAL POPULATION: A REVISED VERSION OF THE GENERAL PARANOIA SCALE FOR ADOLESCENTS
European Scientific Journal August 2014 edition vol.10
PARANOIA IN THE GENERAL POPULATION: A REVISED VERSION OF THE GENERAL PARANOIA SCALE FOR ADOLESCENTS
Celia Barreto Carvalho 0
0 Department of Educational Sciences, University of Azores , Portugal; CINEICC , Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra , Portugal Vera Pereira, MA Marina Sousa , MA Department of Educational Sciences, University of Azores, Portugal Carolina da Motta, MA Department of Educational Sciences, University of Azores Portugal; CINEICC, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra , Portugal Jose Pinto-Gouveia, PhD CINEICC , Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra, Portugal Suzana Nunes Caldeira, PhD Ermelindo Bernardo Peixoto, PhD Department of Educational Sciences, University of Azores, Portugal Allan Fenigstein, PhD Department of Psychology, Samuel Mather Hall, Kenyon College , Gambier, Ohio
The aim of the current study was to validate the General Paranoia Scale for Portuguese Adolescents population (GPS-A). This scale assesses the paranoid ideation in non-clinical population. Results from a confirmatory factor analysis of the scale on 1218 youths confirmed an alternative model to the one-dimensional model proposed by Fenigstein and Vanable (1992) comprising three different dimensions (Mistrust thoughts, persecutory ideas and depreciation). This alternative model presented a good fit: 2(162)= 727.200, p = .000; CFI = .925; RMSEA = .054, P(rmsea 0.05) = .000; PCFI = .788; AIC = 863.200. All items presented adequate factor loadings (ij 0.5) and individual reliability ((ij)2 0.25). Further data analysis on the
-
scale revealed that the GPS-A is an adequate assessment tool for adolescents,
with good psychometric characteristics and high internal consistency.
Introduction
A large body of research has emphasized the social nature of
paranoid ideation, and how it can be described by biased perceptions
observed in the relationships established between individuals (Fenigstein,
Scheier & Buss, 1975 cit in Fenigstein & Vanable, 1992). Paranoid ideation
has then been conceptualized as a cognitive process (Fenigstein & Vanable,
1992; Verdoux & van Os, 2002; Combs, Michael & Penn, 2006; Campbell &
Morrinson, 2007; vanOs, Linscott, Myin-Germeys, Delespaul &
Krabbendam, 2009; Melo, 2010; Michael, Shaffner & Shultze, 2011) used by
individuals to cope with the social world. Fenigstein & Vanable (1992)
distinguished subclinical paranoia as a form of thought marked by
exaggerated self-reference and stable tendencies to Mistrust, hold grudges or
resent others, and a belief in external control or influence (Fenigstein &
Vanable, 1992; Combs & Penn, 2004) that can occur in normal daily
behavior. On the other hand, clinical paranoia includes persecutory delirious
and Mistrust. With the exception of a few studies exploring the processing of
social information in paranoia (e.g. Combs & Penn, 2004), the majority of
the studies investigates only the cognitive abilities and do not include
socialcognitive measures of processing.
Individuals explain everyday events and their own behavior by
engaging and manifesting some degree of paranoid ideation (Eaton,
Ramanoski, Anthony & Nestad, 1991; Fenigstein & Vanable, 1992; Ellet,
Lopes & Chadwick, 2003; Freeman, Garety, Bebbington, Smith, Rollinson,
Fowler, et al., 2005; Binbay, Drukker, Elbi, Aksu, Tanik & Ozkinay, et al.,
2011). Bentall, Kinderman & Kaney (1994) suggested that paranoia is
related to external attributional styles, as a defense against negative threat to
self and, therefore, related to social comparison, social submission and
external shame behaviors (Fenigstein & Vanable, 1992; Freeman et al.,
2005; Gilbert, Boxall, Cheung & Irons, 2005; Combs, Michael & Penn,
2006; Castilho, Pinto-Gouveia & Duarte, 2013; Barreto Carvalho,
PintoGouveia, Peixoto & da Motta, 2014a, Barretto Carvalho et al., 2014b). In
accordance with these studies, Martin & Penn (2001) and Freeman et al.
(2005) found that avoidance and fear of negative evaluation were two of the
best predictors of paranoid ideation.
These conceptualizations are in accordance to the perspective of a
continuum between normal and pathological paranoia, and to the acceptance
of paranoia as a common experience in the general population (Beck,
Freeman & Associates, 1990, van Os, Hanssen, Bijl & Raveli, 2000;
Freeman, et al., 2002; Verdoux & vanOs, 2002; Ellet, Lopes & Chadwick,
2003; Freeman, et al., 2005; Esterberg & Compton, 2009; Yung, Nelson,
Baker, Buckby, Baksheev & Cosgrave, 2009; Freeman, Pugh, Vorontsova,
Antley & Slater, 2010; Binbay, et al., 2011; Barreto Carvalho, et al., 2014a,
2014b). For this reason, paranoia is a phenomena that should also be
explored in non-clinical populations (Freeman et al., 2005; Barreto Carvalho
et al., 2014a, 2014b), and not be exclusively abridged by severe
psychopathological entities. Freeman et al., (2005), referred that about 1 (...truncated)