Search

Several integrated models of psychosis have implicated adverse, stressful contexts and experiences, and affective and cognitive processes in the onset of psychosis. In these models, the effects of stress are posited to contribute to the development of psychotic experiences via pathways through affective disturbance, cognitive biases, and anomalous experiences. However, attempts to systematically test comprehensive models of these pathways remain sparse. Using the Experience Sampling Method in 51 individuals with first-episode psychosis (FEP), 46 individuals with an atrisk mental state (ARMS) for psychosis, and 53 controls, we investigated how stress, enhanced threat anticipation, and experiences of aberrant salience combine to increase the intensity of psychotic experiences. We fitted multilevel moderated mediation models to investigate indirect effects across these groups. We found that the effects of stress on psychotic experiences were mediated via pathways through affective disturbance in all 3 groups. The effect of stress on psychotic experiences was mediated by threat anticipation in FEP individuals and controls but not in ARMS individuals. There was only weak evidence of mediation via aberrant salience. However, aberrant salience retained a substantial direct effect on psychotic experiences, independently of stress, in all 3 groups. Our findings provide novel insights on the role of affective disturbance and threat anticipation in pathways through which stress impacts on the formation of psychotic experiences across different stages of early psychosis in daily life.

The Cognitive Biases Questionnaire for psychosis (CBQp) was developed to capture 5 cognitive distortions (jumping to conclusions, intentionalising, catastrophising, emotional reasoning, and dichotomous thinking), which are considered important for the pathogenesis of psychosis. Vignettes were adapted from the Cognitive Style Test (CST),(1) relating to "Anomalous Perceptions" and "Threatening Events" themes.Scale structure, reliability, and validity were investigated in a psychosis group, and CBQp scores were compared with those of depressed and healthy control samples.The CBQp showed good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The 5 biases were not independent, with a 2-related factor scale providing the best fit. This structure suggests that the CBQp assesses a general thinking bias rather than distinct cognitive errors, while Anomalous Perception and Threatening Events theme scores can be used separately. Total CBQp scores showed good convergent validity with the CST, but individual biases were not related to existing tasks purporting to assess similar reasoning biases. Psychotic and depressed populations scored higher than healthy controls, and symptomatic psychosis patients scored higher than their nonsymptomatic counterparts, with modest relationships between CBQp scores and symptom severity once emotional disorders were partialled out. Anomalous Perception theme and Intentionalising bias scores showed some specificity to psychosis.Overall, the CBQp has good psychometric properties, although it is likely that it measures a different construct to existing tasks, tentatively suggested to represent a bias of interpretation rather than reasoning, judgment or decision-making processes. It is a potentially useful tool in both research and clinical arenas.