IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v14y2022i2p162-175.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What can experimental studies tell us about paranoia and anxiety? A systematic review with implications for theory and clinical practice

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Bennetts
  • Lusia Stopa
  • Katherine Newman-Taylor

Abstract

BackgroundPsychosis is one of the most disabling and costly long-term conditions, and treatment outcomes remain modest. Interventions focused on specific symptoms, such as paranoia, show promise and typically target cognitive and behavioural maintenance processes. Anxiety is implicated in theories of paranoia; however, the nature of the relationship remains unclear. We review experimental studies of paranoia and anxiety against existing cognitive models.MethodA systematic review strategy identified experimental studies assessing levels of anxiety and paranoia. Papers were assessed for quality, and data relating to samples, measures, designs and key findings were extracted and narratively synthesised.ResultsNineteen studies met criteria for the review. Most found that manipulations impacting anxiety also impacted paranoia, with preliminary evidence for a causal relationship. The overall quality of the research was weak.DiscussionWe recommend a research agenda to confirm initial evidence for the causal role of anxiety in increased paranoia, and whether targeting affect, in addition to cognitive and behavioural maintenance processes, improves outcomes in clinical groups and those at risk of psychosis.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Bennetts & Lusia Stopa & Katherine Newman-Taylor, 2022. "What can experimental studies tell us about paranoia and anxiety? A systematic review with implications for theory and clinical practice," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 162-175, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:14:y:2022:i:2:p:162-175
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2021.1909112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2021.1909112
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2021.1909112?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:14:y:2022:i:2:p:162-175. 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.