[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.In addition, Bentall et al.(1994)point out that many common delusional beliefs, such as paranoid and grandiosedelusions, reflect the person s position in the social universe, after all a commonpre-occupation.Delusions of reference can stem from a sense of relationshipbetween individuals and the media, which is actively encouraged by many TV andradio shows.A frequently quoted American poll (Gallup and Newport, 1991) identified thatone-fourth of the surveyed sample believed in ghosts; one-fourth believed they hadhad a telepathic experience; one-sixth believed they had been in touch with someonewho had died; one-tenth had seen or been in presence of a ghost; over 50% believed inthe devil; one-tenth had talked to the devil; and one-seventh had seen a flying saucer.Western culture is fascinated with unexplained phenomena such as UFOs, theparanormal and conspiracy theories.Many delusions reflect a religious or spiritualtheme.The psychiatric profession and its diagnostic tools have been attacked bysome authors as medicalising and pathologising participation in certain types ofreligious groups and experiences (Richardson, 1993b).How does one distinguishbetween a belief in an accepted God (by the main cultural standard of a particularsociety), an unusual God (as adhered to by subcultures within a particular society),and an idiosyncratic God (a delusion with a religious content)? Furthermore, howis the mental health professional qualified to make such a distinction?Psychological Conceptualisations of DelusionsThe discussion above illustrates the difficulties inherent in defining delusions,however, readily identifiable clinically.Newer psychological definitions have tendedto concentrate on more descriptive, operational criteria (e.g.Kendler et al., 1983;Oltmanns, 1988).Garety and Hemsley (1994), in an influential book, describedelusions as: (i) continuous rather than dichotomous; (ii) multi-dimensional ratherthan unidimensional; (iii) potentially responsive rather than fixed; (iv) psycholog-ically understandable; and (v) involving rational processes.Perhaps the mostimportant recognition in these psychological definitions is the emphasis on delu-sions being neither dichotomous nor unidimensional.While the dichotomous viewof delusions had been challenged by Strauss as early as 1969, and by Chapman andChapman in the early 80s (1980), the lack of working definitions had hamperedscientific research in this area.However, there is now a growing body of studies thatsupport these claims empirically.For instance, surveys investigating delusional ideation in the general population.Verdoux et al.(1998) found that the range of individual item endorsement on thePeters et al.(1996) Delusions Inventory (PDI), in individuals with no psychiatrichistory, varied between 5 and 70%, whereas Peters, Joseph and Garety (1999) foundthat 10% of their normal sample had scores on the PDI which exceeded the mean of 132 Psychosis and Spiritualitya psychotic, in-patient group.The percentage of people reporting psychotic symp-tomatology is even higher in psychiatric, but non-psychotic populations (Altmanet al., 1997) Many authors have also commented on the similarities between over-valued ideas, obsessions and delusions (Kozac and Foa, 1994).These findings demonstrate fairly conclusively that there are no clear-cut divisionsbetween normality and delusional thinking, and between delusions and other typesof pathological thinking.There is also persuasive evidence for the multidimension-ality of delusions (Harrow et al., 1988; Kendler et al., 1983; Garety and Hemsley,1987).Throughout these studies, the recurrent dimensions that emerge concernlevels of conviction, pre-occupation, and distress.Their importance were confirmedby Peters et al.(1999) who found that their normal and deluded samples weredifferentiated by their scores on the dimensions of conviction, pre-occupation anddistress, despite an overlap in the range of scores between the two groups in theendorsement of delusional items.Empirical Studies Comparing Religious and Delusional BeliefsThe themes of continuity and multidimensionality are of fundamental importancein the literature comparing intense spiritual and religious beliefs with delusions witha religious content.Jackson (1997) attempted to distinguish between psychotic andspiritual phenomena by comparing two groups of individuals reporting suchexperiences on a variety of psychometric tools.He concluded that there was noclear borderline between the two, with a common, schizotypal personality traitunderlying both forms on the spiritual-psychotic continuum.Jones and Watson(1997), on the other hand, found that schizophrenic delusions could be differen-tiated from religious beliefs held by normals on a number of significant variables,such as pre-occupation, speed of formation, perceptual evidence and use ofimagination.Such apparent inconsistencies are mostly owing to the types of peopleunder study: whilst Jackson s respondents consisted of individuals who reportedunusual spiritual experiences, Jones and Watson s sample deliberately excludedmembers of religious minority groups.Nevertheless, it should be noted that fewerdifferences were found between religious and delusional beliefs, than betweendelusional and control beliefs in the same individuals.Notably, religious andpsychotic beliefs were not rated differently in terms of truthfulness or conviction.Another interesting group to investigate are members of NRMs (see Richardson,1995, for a review).The groups which have been most studied include the JesusMovement Group (now disbanded), the Rajneeshees, and Hare Krishna devotees.Extensive data on their personal background and attitudes have been collected(Latkin et al., 1987; Richardson et al., 1979), as well as comprehensive batteries ofpersonality assessments such as the Myers-Briggs Inventory and the MinnesotaMultiphasic Personality Inventory (Poling and Kenny, 1986; Ross, 1983).Variousmeasures of subjective well-being such as perceived stress, social support and self-esteem have been reported (Latkin et al [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl odbijak.htw.pl
.In addition, Bentall et al.(1994)point out that many common delusional beliefs, such as paranoid and grandiosedelusions, reflect the person s position in the social universe, after all a commonpre-occupation.Delusions of reference can stem from a sense of relationshipbetween individuals and the media, which is actively encouraged by many TV andradio shows.A frequently quoted American poll (Gallup and Newport, 1991) identified thatone-fourth of the surveyed sample believed in ghosts; one-fourth believed they hadhad a telepathic experience; one-sixth believed they had been in touch with someonewho had died; one-tenth had seen or been in presence of a ghost; over 50% believed inthe devil; one-tenth had talked to the devil; and one-seventh had seen a flying saucer.Western culture is fascinated with unexplained phenomena such as UFOs, theparanormal and conspiracy theories.Many delusions reflect a religious or spiritualtheme.The psychiatric profession and its diagnostic tools have been attacked bysome authors as medicalising and pathologising participation in certain types ofreligious groups and experiences (Richardson, 1993b).How does one distinguishbetween a belief in an accepted God (by the main cultural standard of a particularsociety), an unusual God (as adhered to by subcultures within a particular society),and an idiosyncratic God (a delusion with a religious content)? Furthermore, howis the mental health professional qualified to make such a distinction?Psychological Conceptualisations of DelusionsThe discussion above illustrates the difficulties inherent in defining delusions,however, readily identifiable clinically.Newer psychological definitions have tendedto concentrate on more descriptive, operational criteria (e.g.Kendler et al., 1983;Oltmanns, 1988).Garety and Hemsley (1994), in an influential book, describedelusions as: (i) continuous rather than dichotomous; (ii) multi-dimensional ratherthan unidimensional; (iii) potentially responsive rather than fixed; (iv) psycholog-ically understandable; and (v) involving rational processes.Perhaps the mostimportant recognition in these psychological definitions is the emphasis on delu-sions being neither dichotomous nor unidimensional.While the dichotomous viewof delusions had been challenged by Strauss as early as 1969, and by Chapman andChapman in the early 80s (1980), the lack of working definitions had hamperedscientific research in this area.However, there is now a growing body of studies thatsupport these claims empirically.For instance, surveys investigating delusional ideation in the general population.Verdoux et al.(1998) found that the range of individual item endorsement on thePeters et al.(1996) Delusions Inventory (PDI), in individuals with no psychiatrichistory, varied between 5 and 70%, whereas Peters, Joseph and Garety (1999) foundthat 10% of their normal sample had scores on the PDI which exceeded the mean of 132 Psychosis and Spiritualitya psychotic, in-patient group.The percentage of people reporting psychotic symp-tomatology is even higher in psychiatric, but non-psychotic populations (Altmanet al., 1997) Many authors have also commented on the similarities between over-valued ideas, obsessions and delusions (Kozac and Foa, 1994).These findings demonstrate fairly conclusively that there are no clear-cut divisionsbetween normality and delusional thinking, and between delusions and other typesof pathological thinking.There is also persuasive evidence for the multidimension-ality of delusions (Harrow et al., 1988; Kendler et al., 1983; Garety and Hemsley,1987).Throughout these studies, the recurrent dimensions that emerge concernlevels of conviction, pre-occupation, and distress.Their importance were confirmedby Peters et al.(1999) who found that their normal and deluded samples weredifferentiated by their scores on the dimensions of conviction, pre-occupation anddistress, despite an overlap in the range of scores between the two groups in theendorsement of delusional items.Empirical Studies Comparing Religious and Delusional BeliefsThe themes of continuity and multidimensionality are of fundamental importancein the literature comparing intense spiritual and religious beliefs with delusions witha religious content.Jackson (1997) attempted to distinguish between psychotic andspiritual phenomena by comparing two groups of individuals reporting suchexperiences on a variety of psychometric tools.He concluded that there was noclear borderline between the two, with a common, schizotypal personality traitunderlying both forms on the spiritual-psychotic continuum.Jones and Watson(1997), on the other hand, found that schizophrenic delusions could be differen-tiated from religious beliefs held by normals on a number of significant variables,such as pre-occupation, speed of formation, perceptual evidence and use ofimagination.Such apparent inconsistencies are mostly owing to the types of peopleunder study: whilst Jackson s respondents consisted of individuals who reportedunusual spiritual experiences, Jones and Watson s sample deliberately excludedmembers of religious minority groups.Nevertheless, it should be noted that fewerdifferences were found between religious and delusional beliefs, than betweendelusional and control beliefs in the same individuals.Notably, religious andpsychotic beliefs were not rated differently in terms of truthfulness or conviction.Another interesting group to investigate are members of NRMs (see Richardson,1995, for a review).The groups which have been most studied include the JesusMovement Group (now disbanded), the Rajneeshees, and Hare Krishna devotees.Extensive data on their personal background and attitudes have been collected(Latkin et al., 1987; Richardson et al., 1979), as well as comprehensive batteries ofpersonality assessments such as the Myers-Briggs Inventory and the MinnesotaMultiphasic Personality Inventory (Poling and Kenny, 1986; Ross, 1983).Variousmeasures of subjective well-being such as perceived stress, social support and self-esteem have been reported (Latkin et al [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]