A comparison of anomalous experiences in individuals with and without a diagnosis of psychotic disorder

Abstract

The aims of this study were to identify (1) the factor structure of anomalous experiences across the psychosis continuum; (2) qualitative and quantitative differences in psychotic experiences (PEs) between “non need-for-care” and two clinical groups: psychosis patients and individuals at ultra high risk (UHR) of psychosis. We aimed to distinguish which types of experiences would be related to malign (need-for-care and/or help-seeking) versus benign outcomes.Component scores obtained from a Principal Components Analysis of PEs from lifetime scores on the Appraisals of Anomalous Experience Inventory (Brett et al., 2007) were compared across 96 participants: patients diagnosed with a psychotic disorder (n = 37), help-seeking UHR people (n = 21), and non-clinical individuals presenting with enduring PEs (n = 38).A five-component structure provided the best solution, comprising dissociative-type experiences, subjective cognitive deficits, and three separate components relating to “positive” symptoms. All groups reported “positive” experiences, such as ideas of reference and hallucinations, with the non-clinical group displaying more PEs in the Paranormal/Hallucinatory component than both clinical groups. “Cognitive/Attentional anomalies” was the only component where the clinical groups reported significantly more anomalies than the non-clinical group. However psychosis patients reported more frequent first-rank type symptoms and “hypomanic” type PEs than the other groups.“Positive” PEs were common across the psychosis spectrum, although first-rank type symptoms were particularly marked in participants diagnosed with a psychotic disorder. Help-seeking and need-for-care were associated with the presence of subjective cognitive disturbances. These findings suggest that anomalies of cognition and attention may be more relevant to poorer outcomes than the presence of anomalous experiences.