Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T06:37:10.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interpersonal Processes and Hearing Voices: A Study of the Association Between Relating to Voices and Distress in Clinical and Non-Clinical Hearers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2009

Eleanor Sorrell ,
Mark Hayward  and
Sara Meddings
Eleanor Sorrell
Affiliation:
North Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Mark Hayward*
Affiliation:
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and University of Surrey, UK
Sara Meddings
Affiliation:
Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK
*
Reprint requests to Mark Hayward, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: Previous research suggests that the distress experienced by clinical voice hearers is associated with the perceived relationship between voice and hearer, independent of beliefs about voices and depression. Aims: This study aimed to replicate these findings and generate further hypotheses by comparing the voice hearing experiences of clinical and non-clinical hearers. Method: A cross-sectional, quantitative design was employed and used between-subjects and correlational methods. Thirty-two clinical voice hearers and 18 non-clinical voice hearers were assessed using the PSYRATS, the Voice and You questionnaire, the Beliefs About Voices Questionnaire – Revised, and the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Results: For clinical voice hearers, distress was significantly associated with perceptions of the voice as dominating and intrusive, and hearers distancing themselves from the voice. However, these associations were not independent of beliefs about voices’ omnipotence or malevolence. Non-clinical voice hearers were significantly less distressed than clinical voice hearers and voices were perceived as less dominant, intrusive, malevolent and omnipotent. Non-clinical hearers were found to relate from a position of less distance to voices perceived as benevolent. Conclusions: Findings from previous research were only partially replicated. Clinically, the development of less maladaptive relationships between voice and voice hearer may reduce distress.

Keywords

Voice-hearingbeliefsinterpersonal issuescognitive therapy
Type
Research Article
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , March 2010 , pp. 127 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abba, N., Chadwick, P. and Stevenson, C. (2008). Responding mindfully to distressing psychosis: a grounded theory analysis. Psychotherapy Research, 18, 77–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baron, R. and Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.Google Scholar
Beck, A. and Rector, N. (2003). A cognitive model of hallucinations. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 27, 19–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, A., Steer, R. and Brown, G. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory Manual (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Benjamin, L. (1989). Is chronicity a function of the relationship between the person and the auditory hallucination? Schizophrenia Bulletin, 15, 291–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birchwood, M. and Chadwick, P. (1997). The omnipotence of voices: testing the validity of a cognitive model. Psychological Medicine, 27, 1345–1353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birchwood, M., Gilbert, P., Gilbert, J., Trower, P., Meaden, A., Hay, J., Murray, E. and Miles, J. N. V. (2004). Interpersonal and role-related schema influence the relationship with the dominant “voice” in schizophrenia: a comparison of three models. Psychological Medicine, 34, 1571–1580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birchwood, M., Meaden, A., Trower, P., Gilbert, P. and Plaistow, J. (2000). The power and omnipotence of voices: subordination and entrapment by voices and significant others. Psychological Medicine, 30, 337–344.Google Scholar
Birtchnell, J. (1996). How Humans Relate: a new interpersonal theory. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Birtchnell, J. (2001). Relating therapy with individuals, couples and families. Journal of Family Therapy, 23, 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birtchnell, J. (2002). Psychotherapy and the interpersonal octagon. Psychology and Psychotherapy-Theory Research and Practice, 75, 349–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birtchnell, J., Voortmn, S., De Jong, C. and Gordon, D. (2006). Measuring interrelating in couples: the Couple's Relating to Each Other Questionnaires (CREOQ). Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 79, 339–364.Google Scholar
Chadwick, P. (2006). Person-Based Cognitive Therapy for Distressing Psychosis. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chadwick, P. D. J. and Birchwood, M. J. (1994). Challenging the omnipotence of voices: a cognitive approach to auditory hallucinations. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 190–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chadwick, P., Birchwood, M. and Trower, P. (1996). Cognitive Therapy for Delusions, Voices and Paranoia. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Chadwick, P., Lees, S. and Birchwood, M. (2000). The revised beliefs about voices questionnaire (BAVQ-R). British Journal of Psychiatry, 177, 229–232.Google Scholar
Chin, J. T., Hayward, M. and Drinnan, A. (2009). Relating to voices: exploring the relevance of this concept to people who hear voices. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice. 82, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, M. F., Griffin, M. and Vice, S. (2001). Affective reactions to auditory hallucinations in psychotic, evangelical and control groups. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40, 361–370.Google Scholar
Field, A. (2000). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS for Windows. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Goodliffe, L., Hayward, M., Brown, D., Turton, W., Chadwick, P. and Dannahy, L. (2009). Person based cognitive therapy for voices: the hearers’ perspective. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Haddock, G., McCarron, J., Tarrier, N. and Faragher, E. B. (1999). Scales to measure dimensions of hallucinations and delusions: the psychotic symptom rating scales (PSYRATS). Psychological Medicine, 29, 879–889.Google Scholar
Haddock, G., Slade, P., Bentall, R. P., Reid, D. and Faragher, E. B. (1998). A comparison of the long-term effectiveness of distraction and focussing in the treatment of auditory hallucinations. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 71, 339–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayward, M. (2003). Interpersonal relating and voice hearing: to what extent does relating to the voice reflect social relating? Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 76, 369–383.Google Scholar
Hayward, M., Denney, J., Vaughan, S. and Fowler, D. (2008). The voice and you: development and psychometric evaluation of a measure of relationships with voices. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 15, 45–52.Google Scholar
Hayward, M. and May, R. (2007) Daring to talk back. Mental Health Practice, 10, 12–15.Google Scholar
Hayward, M., Overton, J., Dorey, D. and Denney, J. (2009) Relating therapy for people who hear voices: a case series. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 16, 216–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honig, A., Romme, M., Ensink, B., Escher, S., Pennings, M. and Devries, M. (1998). Auditory hallucinations: a comparison between patients and nonpatients. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 186, 646–651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality. New York: Ronald.Google Scholar
Leudar, I., Thomas, P., McNally, D. and Glinski, A. (1997). What voices do with words: pragmatics of verbal hallucinations. Psychological Medicine, 27, 885–898.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miles, J. and Shelvin, M. (2001). Applied Regression and Correlation. a guide for students and researchers. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Miller, L., O'Connor, E. and DiPasquale, T. (1993). Patients’ attitudes toward hallucinations. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 584–588.Google ScholarPubMed
Morrison, A. (1998). A cognitive analysis of the maintenance of auditory hallucinations: are voices to schizophrenia what bodily sensations are to panic? Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 26, 289–302.Google Scholar
Nayani, T. H. and David, A. S. (1996). The auditory hallucination: a phenomenological survey. Psychological Medicine, 26, 177–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romme, M. and Escher, A. (1989). Hearing voices. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 15, 209–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romme, M. and Escher, S. (1993). Accepting Voices. London: MIND Publications.Google Scholar
Romme, M. and Escher, S. (2000). Making Sense of Voices. London: MIND Publications.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. and Castellan, N. (1988). Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences (2nd ed.). London: McGraw-Hill International Editions.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B. and Fidell, L. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed.). London: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Tarrier, N., Harwood, S. and Yussof, L. (1990). Coping strategy enhancement (CSE): a method of treating residual schizophrenic symptoms. Behavioural Psychotherapy, 18, 643–662.Google Scholar
Thomas, P. and Leudar, I. (1996). Verbal hallucinations or hearing voices: what does the experience signify? Journal of Mental Health, 5, 214–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaughan, S. and Fowler, D. (2004). The distress experienced by voice hearers is associated with the perceived relationship between the voice hearer and the voice. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 143–153.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.