Author
Listed:
- Keith Gaynor
- Catherine Foy
- Kaiya Reddy
- Shelley Grady
Abstract
BackgroundTrauma and other adverse social experiences have been hypothesised to lead to psychotic-like experiences through disrupted attachment and dissociation. Although well grounded in the literature, the model is still to be fully validated.MethodsThis study tested the predictive validity of the Trauma and Social Pathways model of Psychosis, using a cross-sectional, quantitative online methodology with a self-selecting sample of people reporting multi-modal unusual sensory expereinces (USEs). Participants (n = 149) completed a survey examining trauma exposure, dissociative experiences, attachment, social rank and six separate USEs. The theoretical model was tested using hierarchical linear regression models and Structured Equation Modelling (SEM).ResultsHierarchical regression analyses found that all USEs were predicted by trauma-exposure, anxious attachment, and dissociation. Social comparison and compartmentalisation were not strong components of the model. SEM analysis indicated that, overall, the model was well fitted and described a dual route to auditory hallucinations via disrupted attachment or trauma-exposure, mutually mediated by dissociation.DiscussionThe findings underscore the importance of addressing adverse events, dissociation and attachment in understanding the development of multi-modal USEs and in guiding the formulation and intervention of clinical presentations of psychosis. Additionally, fostering attachment security at a service level could improve engagement with mental health services.
Suggested Citation
Keith Gaynor & Catherine Foy & Kaiya Reddy & Shelley Grady, 2025.
"Testing the trauma and Social Pathways model of psychosis as a predictor of unusual sensory experiences,"
Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 238-251, July.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:17:y:2025:i:3:p:238-251
DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2024.2436920
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:17:y:2025:i:3:p:238-251. 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.