Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A model of psychosis and its relationship with impairment

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Some studies suggest that positive symptoms of psychosis—clinical and sub-clinical alike—reflect a single, continuously distributed dimension in the population. It is unknown, however, whether such a spectrum of positive psychotic experiences is non-linearly related to outcomes such as daily functioning. This work aims to characterize the relationship between positive psychosis and impairment.

Methods

Data from the Office of National Statistics National Psychiatric Morbidity Surveys of Great Britain were used to establish measurement models of psychosis and impairment. Competing linear and nonlinear models of the relationship between the two latent variables were evaluated using mixture structural equation models.

Results

Positive psychosis is best modeled by a continuous, normal distribution. Increases in positive psychosis correlate with roughly linear increases in impairment.

Conclusions

Positive psychotic symptoms occur throughout the population without a discrete, pathological threshold. Functional deficits are linearly associated with the psychosis at all points along the continuum, and a significant portion of the population experiences subclinical psychosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ruscio J, Ruscio AM (2000) Informing the continuity controversy: a taxometric analysis of depression. J Abnorm Psychol 109(3):473–487

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Oord EJC, Pickles A, Waldman ID (2003) Normal variation and abnormality: an empirical study of the liability distributions underlying depression and delinquency. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 44(2):180–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Markon KE, Krueger RF (2005) Categorical and continuous models of liability to externalizing disorders: a direct comparison in NESARC. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62(12):1352–1359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schmitt JE, Mehta PD, Aggen SH, Kubarych TS, Neale MC (2006) Semi-nonparametric methods for detecting latent non-normality: a fusion of latent trait and ordered latent class modeling. Multivar Behav Res 41:427–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Haslam N, Holland E, Kuppens P (2011) Categorical versus dimensions in personality and psychopathology: a quantitative review of taxometric research. Psychol Med 41(11):1–18

    Google Scholar 

  6. Shevlin M, Adamson G, Vollebergh W, de Graaf R, van Os J (2007) An application of item response mixture modeling to psychosis indicators in two large community samples. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 42(10):771–779

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Daneluzzo E, Stratta P, Di Tommaso S, Pacifico R, Riccardi I, Rossi A (2009) Dimensional, non-taxonic latent structure of psychotic symptoms in a student sample. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 44(11):911–916

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Linscott RJ, van Os J (2010) Systematic reviews of categorical versus continuum models in psychosis: evidence for discontinuous subpopulations underlying a psychometric continuum. Implications for DSM-V, DSM-VI, and DSM-VII. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 6:391–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Flett GL, Vredenburg K, Krames L (1997) The continuity of depression in clinical and nonclinical samples. Psychol Bull 121:395–416

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Pickles A, Angold A (2003) Natural categories or fundamental dimensions: on carving nature at the joints and the rearticulation of psychopathology. Dev Psychopathol 15(03):529–551

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jenkins R, Bebbington P, Brugha T, Farrell M, Gill B, Lewis G, Meltzer H, Petticrew M (1997) The national psychiatric morbidity surveys of Great Britain—strategy and methods. Psychol Med 27(04):765–774

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jenkins R, Bebbington P, Brugha T, Farrell M, Gill B, Lewis G, Meltzer H, Petticrew M (2003) The national psychiatric morbidity surveys of Great Britain—strategy and methods. Int Rev Psychiatry (Abingdon, England) 15:5–13

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Singleton N, Bumpstead R, O’Brien M, Lee A, Meltzer H (2003) Psychiatric morbidity among adults living in private households, 2000. Int Rev Psychiatry 15(1–2):65–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. McManus S, Meltzer H, Brugha T, Bebbington P, Jenkins R (2009) Adult psychiatric morbidity in England, 2007: results of a household survey. The NHS Centre for Health and Social care, UK

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bebbington P, Nayani T (1995) The psychosis screening questionnaire. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 5(1):11–19

    Google Scholar 

  16. Pincus T, Summey JA, Soraci JRSA, Wallston KA, Hummon NP (1983) Assessment of patient satisfaction in activities of daily living using a modified Stanford health assessment questionnaire. Arthr Rheum 26(11):1346–1353

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 34(3):220–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Muthen BO, Muthen L (2007) MPlus user’s guide, 5th edn. Muthen & Muthen, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  19. Muthén BO, Tihomir A (2002) Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus. Mplus Web Notes 4(5):1–22

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wirth RJ, Edwards MC (2007) Item factor analysis: current approaches and future directions. Psychol Methods 12(1):58–79

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Klein A, Moosbrugger H (2000) Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction effects with the LMS method. Psychometrika 65(4):457–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee S-Y, Zhu H-T (2002) Maximum likelihood estimation of nonlinear structural equation models. Psychometrika 67(2):189–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wall MM, Amemiya Y (2000) Estimation for polynomial structural equation models. J Am Stat Assoc 95(451):929–940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bauer D (2005) A semiparametric approach to modeling nonlinear relations among latent variables. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 12(4):513–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Markon KE (2010) How things fall apart: understanding the nature of internalizing through its relationship with impairment. J Abnorm Psychol 119(3):447–458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Schwarz G (1978) Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 6(2):461–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Biernacki C, Celeux G, Govaert G (1998) Assessing a mixture model for clustering with the integrated classification likelihood. Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique: Unite de Recherche Rhone-Alpes 14802(a):27

  28. Akaike H (1981) Likelihood of a model and information criteria. J Econom 16:3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Henson JM, Reise SP, Kim KH (2007) Detecting mixtures from structural model differences using latent variable mixture modeling: a comparison of relative model fit statistics. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 14(2):202–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nylund KL, Asparouhov T, Muthen BO (2007) Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: a Monte Carlo simulation study. Struct Equ Model 14(4):535–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lo Y, Mendell NR, Rubin DB (2001) Testing the number of components in a normal mixture. Biometrika 88(3):767–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vuong QH (1989) Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica 57(2):307–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Pek J, Sterba SK, Kok BE, Bauer DJ (2009) Estimating and visualizing nonlinear relations among latent variables: a semiparametric approach. Multivar Behav Res 44(4):407–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Murphy J, Shevlin M, Adamson G (2007) A latent class analysis of positive psychosis symptoms based on the British Psychiatric Morbidity Survey. Pers Individ Differ 42(8):1491–1502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Raftery A (1995) Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociol Methodol 25:111–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. van Os J, Hanssen M, Bijl RV, Ravelli A (2000) Strauss (1969) revisited: a psychosis continuum in the general population? Schizophr Res 45(1–2):11–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Stefanis NC, Hanssen M, Smirnis NK, Avramopoulos DA, Evdokimidis IK, Stefanis CN, Verdoux H, van Os J (2002) Evidence that three dimensions of psychosis have a distribution in the general population. Psychol Med 32(02):347–358

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kelleher I, Cannon M (2011) Psychotic-like experiences in the general population: characterizing a high-risk group for psychosis. Psychol Med 41(01):1–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Claridge G (1994) Single indicator of risk for schizophrenia: probable fact or likely myth? Schizophr Bull 20(1):151–168

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Walker E, Kestler L, Bollini A, Hochman KM (2004) Schizophrenia: etiology and Course. Annu Rev Psychol 55(1):401–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Nuevo R, Chatterji S, Verdes E, Naidoo N, Arango C, Ayuso-Mateos JL (2012) The continuum of psychotic symptoms in the general population: a cross-national study. Schizophr Bull 38(3):475–485

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kessler RC, Birnbaum H, Demler O et al (2005) The prevalence and correlates of nonaffective psychosis in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). Biol Psychiatry 58(8):668–676

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kendler KS, Gallagher TJ, Abelson JM, Kessler RC (1996) Lifetime prevalence, demographic risk factors, and diagnostic validity of nonaffective psychosis as assessed in a US community sample: the national comorbidity survey. Arch Gen Psychiatry 53(11):1022–1031

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Lasalvia A, Boggian I, Bonetto C, Saggioro V, Piccione G, Zanoni C, Cristofalo D, Lamonaco D (2012) Multiple perspectives on mental health outcome: needs for care and service satisfaction assessed by staff, patients and family members. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 47(7):1035–1045

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Nierop M, van Os J, Gunther N, Myin-Germeys I, de Graaf R, ten Have M, van Dorsselaer S, Bak M, van Winkel R (2012) Phenotypically continuous with clinical psychosis, discontinuous in need for care: evidence for an extended psychosis phenotype. Schizophr Bull 38(2):231–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Arndt S, Andreasen NC, Flaum M, Miller D, Nopoulos P (1995) A longitudinal study of symptom dimensions in schizophrenia: prediction and patterns of change. Archives of general psychiatry. Arch Gen Psychiatry 52(5):352–360

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Eaton WW, Thara R, Federman B, Melton B, Liang K (1995) Structure and course of positive and negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Arch Gen Psychiatry 52(2):127–134

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Iowa, E11 Seashore Hall, Iowa City, IA, 52240, USA

    Katherine G. Jonas & Kristian E. Markon

Authors
  1. Katherine G. Jonas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristian E. Markon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katherine G. Jonas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jonas, K.G., Markon, K.E. A model of psychosis and its relationship with impairment. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 48, 1367–1375 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-012-0642-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-012-0642-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation