J V Anilmis1, C S Stewart2, S Roddy3, N Hassanali4, F Muccio3, S Browning3, K Bracegirdle3, R Corrigall3, K R Laurens5, C Hirsch6, E Kuipers7, L Maddox3, S Jolley4. 1. Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Department of Psychology, London, UK. Electronic address: jasmine.anilmis@kcl.ac.uk. 2. Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Department of Psychology, London, UK; South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 3. South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 4. Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Department of Psychology, London, UK. 5. National Institute for Health Research Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre and Dementia Unit (BRC/U), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, Department of Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences, London, UK; University of New South Wales, School of Psychiatry, Research Unit for Schizophrenia Epidemiology, Sydney, Australia; Schizophrenia Research Institute, Sydney, Australia. 6. Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Department of Psychology, London, UK; National Institute for Health Research Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre and Dementia Unit (BRC/U), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; University of Western Australia, Australia. 7. Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Department of Psychology, London, UK; National Institute for Health Research Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre and Dementia Unit (BRC/U), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive models of adult psychosis propose that negative schematic beliefs (NSBs) mediate the established association between victimisation and psychotic symptoms. In childhood, unusual, or psychotic-like, experiences are associated with bullying (a common form of victimisation) and NSBs. This study tests the mediating role of NSBs in the relationship between bullying and distressing unusual experiences (UEDs) in childhood. METHOD: Ninety-four 8-14 year olds referred to community Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services completed self-report assessments of UEDs, bullying, and NSBs about the self (NS) and others (NO). RESULTS: Both NS and NO were associated with bullying (NS: r=.40, P<.001; NO: r=.33, P=.002), and with UEDs (NS: r=.51, P<.001; NO: r=.43, P<.001). Both NS and NO significantly mediated the relationship between bullying and UEDs (NS: z=3.15, P=.002; NO: z=2.35, P=.019). CONCLUSIONS: Children's NSBs may mediate the adverse psychological impact of victimisation, and are appropriate treatment targets for young people with UEDs. Early educational intervention to reduce negative appraisals of the self and others may increase resilience to future adverse experiences and reduce later mental health risk. Crown
BACKGROUND: Cognitive models of adult psychosis propose that negative schematic beliefs (NSBs) mediate the established association between victimisation and psychotic symptoms. In childhood, unusual, or psychotic-like, experiences are associated with bullying (a common form of victimisation) and NSBs. This study tests the mediating role of NSBs in the relationship between bullying and distressing unusual experiences (UEDs) in childhood. METHOD: Ninety-four 8-14 year olds referred to community Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services completed self-report assessments of UEDs, bullying, and NSBs about the self (NS) and others (NO). RESULTS: Both NS and NO were associated with bullying (NS: r=.40, P<.001; NO: r=.33, P=.002), and with UEDs (NS: r=.51, P<.001; NO: r=.43, P<.001). Both NS and NO significantly mediated the relationship between bullying and UEDs (NS: z=3.15, P=.002; NO: z=2.35, P=.019). CONCLUSIONS:Children's NSBs may mediate the adverse psychological impact of victimisation, and are appropriate treatment targets for young people with UEDs. Early educational intervention to reduce negative appraisals of the self and others may increase resilience to future adverse experiences and reduce later mental health risk. Crown
Authors: Leila Allen; Polly-Anna Ashford; Ella Beeson; Sarah Byford; Jessica Chow; Tim Dalgleish; Andrea Danese; Jack Finn; Ben Goodall; Lauren Grainger; Matthew Hammond; Ayla Humphrey; Gerwyn Mahoney-Davies; Nicola Morant; Lee Shepstone; Erika Sims; Patrick Smith; Paul Stallard; Annie Swanepoel; David Trickey; Katie Trigg; Jon Wilson; Richard Meiser-Stedman Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 2.692