Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Clinical Division of Social Psychiatry, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Section for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
BMC Psychiatry. 2023 Jun 3;23(1):397. doi: 10.1186/s12888-023-04876-9.
Assuming a transdiagnostic and extended psychosis phenotype, psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) and psychotic symptoms are on a phenomenological and temporal continuum between clinical and non-clinical populations. Recent research points towards differences in PLE proneness in different subgroups and clinical impact of different PLE subtypes. This study examines the prevalence of PLEs in three groups of individuals with and without specific sets of beliefs aiming to elucidate the question whether proneness to PLEs varies according to traditional versus less traditional supernatural beliefs.
The anonymized 16-item version of the Prodromal Questionnaire (PQ-16) was used to assess PLEs in three groups including individuals with religious beliefs (RB), belief in esoterism and paranormal phenomena (EB), and those embedded in scientific evidence approach and scepticism towards para-scientific theories (non-believers, NB). Male and female participants between 18 and 90 years were eligible for participation.
The sample comprised 159 individuals including 41 RB individuals, 43 EB individuals, and 75 NB individuals. The mean PQ-16 score of the EB individuals (6.86 ± 4.13) was significantly higher compared to NB individuals (3.43 ± 2.99) and to RB individuals (3.38 ± 3.23) with almost twice the score (both p-values < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the PQ-16 scores of the NB group and the RB group (p = 0.935). No significant impact of age (p = 0.330) and gender (p = 0.061) was found on the PQ16-Score. Group affiliation to esoterism was associated with a higher PQ-16 score compared to group affiliation to religious beliefs (p < 0.001) and group affiliation to scepticism (p = 0.011), while the latter two did not differ significantly (p = 0.735). No significant difference was found between the three groups in the degree of distress related to the affirmatively answered PQ-16 items (p = 0.74).
Under the assumption of a transdiagnostic psychosis phenotype, our findings provide more insight which subgroups within non-clinical samples have a higher likelihood of reporting PLEs.
假设存在一种跨诊断和扩展的精神病表型，精神病样体验（PLEs）和精神病症状在临床和非临床人群之间存在现象学和时间上的连续体。最近的研究表明，不同亚组的 PLE 倾向存在差异，不同 PLE 亚型对临床的影响也不同。本研究旨在探讨三组人群中 PLE 的患病率，这三组人群分别具有特定的信念集，旨在阐明 PLE 倾向是否因传统与非传统超自然信念而异。
使用经过匿名处理的 16 项前驱期问卷（PQ-16）评估三组人群中的 PLE，这三组人群分别为具有宗教信仰（RB）的个体、具有神秘主义和超自然现象信仰（EB）的个体以及具有科学证据方法和对 para-scientific 理论持怀疑态度的个体（非信徒，NB）。年龄在 18 至 90 岁之间的男性和女性参与者均有资格参加。
该样本包括 159 名个体，其中包括 41 名 RB 个体、43 名 EB 个体和 75 名 NB 个体。EB 个体的 PQ-16 得分均值（6.86±4.13）明显高于 NB 个体（3.43±2.99）和 RB 个体（3.38±3.23），得分几乎高出一倍（p 值均<0.001）。NB 组和 RB 组的 PQ-16 得分无显著差异（p=0.935）。年龄（p=0.330）和性别（p=0.061）对 PQ16 评分无显著影响。与宗教信仰群体归属相比，神秘主义群体归属与更高的 PQ-16 评分相关（p<0.001），与怀疑主义群体归属相关（p=0.011），而后者两者之间无显著差异（p=0.735）。在肯定回答 PQ-16 项目相关的困扰程度方面，三组之间无显著差异（p=0.74）。
在跨诊断精神病表型的假设下，我们的研究结果提供了更多的见解，即非临床样本中的哪些亚组更有可能报告 PLEs。
