Lincoln Tania M, Reumann Rebekka, Moritz Steffen
Section for Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Psychology, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Cogn Neuropsychiatry. 2010 Jul;15(4):377-96. doi: 10.1080/13546800903378211. Epub 2010 Jan 27.
Although many people experience paranoid thoughts occasionally, most do not develop clinically relevant paranoia, possibly due to a more functional way of responding. The aim of this study was to create a scale to investigate how healthy individuals react to paranoid thoughts.
Paranoid thoughts were assessed with the Paranoia Checklist (Freeman et al., 2005). The 69-item Reactions to Paranoid Thoughts Scale (RePT) was created in a series of steps. Interviews were conducted to create a preliminary set of items.
Principal components analysis of the data from a healthy sample (N=408) revealed a stable 10-factor solution explaining 69% of the total variance. These factors included depressive, composed, communicative, rational, believing, devaluating, physical, positive distracting, normalising, and concealing reactions to paranoid thoughts. Cronbach's alphas for these factors ranged from .77 to .97. Overall, the strength and pattern of correlations with scales that assess reactions to unwanted thoughts or stressors indicated good convergent and divergent validity of the factors. The most frequently applied reactions to paranoid thoughts were normalising, rational, and composed responses. Persons with more frequent paranoid thoughts were characterised by increased levels of dysfunctional reactions, such as depressive, believing, and concealing reactions in comparison to persons with less frequent paranoid thoughts.
It may prove beneficial to teach persons at risk of psychosis or those with attenuated symptoms new ways of responding to paranoid thoughts.
尽管许多人偶尔会出现偏执想法，但大多数人不会发展为临床上相关的偏执状态，这可能是由于他们具有更有效的应对方式。本研究的目的是创建一个量表，以调查健康个体对偏执想法的反应。
使用偏执清单（弗里曼等人，2005年）评估偏执想法。通过一系列步骤创建了包含69个条目的偏执想法反应量表（RePT）。进行访谈以创建初步的条目集。
对一个健康样本（N = 408）的数据进行主成分分析，得出了一个稳定的10因素解决方案，解释了总方差的69%。这些因素包括对偏执想法的抑郁、平静、交流、理性、相信、贬低、身体、积极分散注意力、正常化和隐瞒反应。这些因素的克朗巴哈系数范围为0.77至0.97。总体而言，与评估对 unwanted 想法或压力源反应的量表的相关强度和模式表明这些因素具有良好的聚合效度和区分效度。对偏执想法最常应用的反应是正常化、理性和平静反应。与偏执想法较少的人相比，偏执想法较频繁的人具有功能失调反应水平增加的特征，例如抑郁、相信和隐瞒反应。
事实可能证明，教导有精神病风险的人或症状较轻的人应对偏执想法的新方法是有益的。
