IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v12y2020i3p257-268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Bergen-Montpellier grandiose ideas questionnaire – B-MGI: a new tool for measuring grandiose delusions

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Bortolon
  • Cindy Lebrun
  • Julien Laloyaux

Abstract

Introduction: Grandiose delusions (GD) are frequent in some clinical populations and can also be found in a minority of the general population. Despite the high prevalence, no specific tools have been developed to assess GD extensively. The present study aimed to develop and validate a specific questionnaire: the Bergen-Montpellier grandiose ideas questionnaire (B-MGI).Method: To begin with, an over-inclusive item pool was generated and subjected to exploratory factor analysis to identify the items to keep and to discard. This was done using a large sample of 183 participants from the general population. A second sample of 181 healthy participants was then used to confirm the 4-factor structure of the B-MGI.Results: Significant, albeit weak, correlations were found between the B-MGI and positive psychotic symptoms, providing initial support for convergent validity. Moreover, the B-MGI was poorly related to negative psychotic symptoms, supporting the discriminant validity of the B-MGI.Conclusion: The B-MGI is the first self-report measure that targets specifically GD. The questionnaire demonstrated good preliminary psychometric properties. Future studies should explore further the psychometric properties of the B-MGI.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Bortolon & Cindy Lebrun & Julien Laloyaux, 2020. "The Bergen-Montpellier grandiose ideas questionnaire – B-MGI: a new tool for measuring grandiose delusions," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 257-268, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:257-268
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2020.1745875
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2020.1745875
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2020.1745875?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:257-268. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.