IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v9y2017i2p184-186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rumination and psychosis: an experimental, analogue study of the role of perseverative thought processes in voice-hearing

Author

Listed:
  • Samantha Hartley
  • Sandra Bucci
  • Anthony P. Morrison

Abstract

We rigorously tested the role of rumination in the development of voice-hearing type experiences. One-hundred and two students watched a video depicting a physical assault and then either ruminated about the contents or were distracted. Participants listened to an anomalous auditory stimulus and recorded any words/phrases along with distress. Manipulation checks confirmed that the rumination group showed greater perseveration regarding the film content than the distraction group. However, the groups did not significantly differ on number of words recorded, convergence with the video content or distress. These findings indicate that rumination might not necessarily be involved in the development of these experiences or associated distress. The current work should provide an impetus to conduct additional rigorously controlled experimental or prospective work to fully discern the key processes relevant to the experience of voice-hearing following exposure to stressful events.

Suggested Citation

  • Samantha Hartley & Sandra Bucci & Anthony P. Morrison, 2017. "Rumination and psychosis: an experimental, analogue study of the role of perseverative thought processes in voice-hearing," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 184-186, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:9:y:2017:i:2:p:184-186
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2017.1280073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2017.1280073
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2017.1280073?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:9:y:2017:i:2:p:184-186. 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.