Schizotypal Personality Models

Schizotypal personality traits and social cognition are associated with childhood trauma exposure

“…While a large number of genetic markers have been associated with schizotypy (Barrantes‐Vidal, Grant, & Kwapil, ; Walter, Fernandez, Snelling, & Barkus, ), it is plausible that the interplay between genetic and environmental risk factors (e.g., childhood trauma) for psychosis might operate via subtle effects on threat perception (i.e., paranoid ideation), independently of the development of illness. Consistent with Raine's neurodevelopmental model of schizotypal personality (Green, Boyle, & Raine, ; Raine, ), it is also possible that environmental interactions with mild genetic liability for schizophrenia may produce similar phenotypes in adulthood despite different routes to their development. This reflects earlier proposals by Meehl (), in proposing that ‘true’ versions of schizotypy (that may lead to clinical psychotic disorder) were distinct from ‘pseudo‐schizotypy’ which he believed to mimic true schizotypy, and to be more heavily influenced by experience rather than genetic contributions.…”

Confirmation of a four-factor structure of the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire among undergraduate students

“…Along these lines, the present study focused on the latent factorial structure of a measurement instrument and the identification of best-fitting models therefore reflects the nature of the measure administered (Kwapil et al, 2008), rather than the complex schizotypy construct itself. Third, other measurement models could have been tested (e.g., the 2-, 3-, and 4-factor models studied by Boyle and Baxter;Green et al, 2008). Furthermore, only select psychometric properties were 15 examined, given that the focus was on factorial validity; data on test-retest reliability would have been beneficial in addition to internal consistency reliability.…”

“…Further, the present study aimed to select the best-fitting factor structure from among five models proposed in the literature (Kendler et al, 1991;Raine et al, 1994;Seiver and Gunderson, 1983;Stefanis et al, 2004;Wuthrich and Bates, 2006), as well as five additional hierarchically related, or nested models (i.e., one is a subset of the other after trimming or modifying the initial model based on theoretical or empirical considerations; Kline, 2005). It should be noted that these 10 models do not represent an exhaustive offering of potential models; for example, Boyle and Baxter performed a series of factor analyses on the SPQ and found a 2-factor solution that separated positive and negative schizotypal traits, as well as 3-and 4-factor models that further subdivided the positive traits (Green et al, 2008). Ongoing research on the factor structure of the SPQ and other measures of schizotypy is crucial given the importance of the schizotypy construct for both personality and behavioral research, as well as psychosis-proneness and schizophrenia research.…”

Universal prevention of schizophrenia and surrogate endpoints at population level

“…We will discuss two measures of the extended psychotic phenotype which we suggest may be suitable candidate SEs in studies of universal prevention strategies for schizophrenia: the prevalence of psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) and population mean of psychometric schizotypy (PS) based on a quantitative assessment of dimensional schizotypy [4], presumed to lie on a continuum in the general population.…”

“…As figured with the dotted arrow (3) some of the changes in CE could be (but are not necessarily) the consequence of changes in SE. Changes in SE reflect a fraction of changes in CE (surrogacy) represented by the common area (4) phenotype'' characterized by sub-threshold manifestations (be it in number of symptoms i.e. PLE or in intensity i.e.…”