Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:04:07.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Measurement Invariance of Schizotypy in Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

E. Fonseca-Pedrero ,
J. Ortuño-Sierra ,
G. Sierro ,
C. Daniel ,
M. Cella ,
A. Preti ,
C. Mohr  and
O.J. Mason
E. Fonseca-Pedrero*
Affiliation:
Department of Educational Sciences, University of La Rioja, Spain Prevention Program for Psychosis (P3), Spain
J. Ortuño-Sierra
Affiliation:
Department of Educational Sciences, University of La Rioja, Spain
G. Sierro
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Switzerland
C. Daniel
Affiliation:
Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, UK
M. Cella
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
A. Preti
Affiliation:
Center of Liaison Psychiatry and Psychosomatics, University Hospital, University of Cagliari, Italy, and Centro Medico Genneruxi, Cagliari, Italy
C. Mohr
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, University of Lausanne, Switzerland
O.J. Mason
Affiliation:
Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, UK
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (E. Fonseca-Pedrero).
Get access

Abstract

The short version of the Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences (sO-LIFE) is a widely used measure assessing schizotypy. There is limited information, however, on how sO-LIFE scores compare across different countries. The main goal of the present study is to test the measurement invariance of the sO-LIFE scores in a large sample of non-clinical adolescents and young adults from four European countries (UK, Switzerland, Italy, and Spain). The scores were obtained from validated versions of the sO-LIFE in their respective languages. The sample comprised 4190 participants (M = 20.87 years; SD = 3.71 years). The study of the internal structure, using confirmatory factor analysis, revealed that both three (i.e., positive schizotypy, cognitive disorganisation, and introvertive anhedonia) and four-factor (i.e., positive schizotypy, cognitive disorganisation, introvertive anhedonia, and impulsive nonconformity) models fitted the data moderately well. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis showed that the three-factor model had partial strong measurement invariance across countries. Eight items were non-invariant across samples. Significant statistical differences in the mean scores of the s-OLIFE were found by country. Reliability scores, estimated with Ordinal alpha ranged from 0.75 to 0.87. Using the Item Response Theory framework, the sO-LIFE provides more accuracy information at the medium and high end of the latent trait. The current results show further evidence in support of the psychometric proprieties of the sO-LIFE, provide new information about the cross-cultural equivalence of schizotypy and support the use of this measure to screen for psychotic-like features and liability to psychosis in general population samples from different European countries.

Keywords

SchizotypySchizotypalInvarianceEquivalenceCross-culturalsO-LIFE
Type
Original article
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 30 , Issue 7 , October 2015 , pp. 837 - 844
Copyright
European Psychiatric Association 2015

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

Arndt, S, Alliger, RJ, Andreasen, NC. The distinction of positive and negative symptoms. The failure of a two-dimensional model. Br J Psychiatry 1991;158:317–322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barragan, M, Laurens, KR, Navarro, JB, Obiols, JE. Psychotic-like experiences and depressive symptoms in a community sample of adolescents. Eur Psychiatry 2011;26:396–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrantes-Vidal, N, Grant, P, Kwapil, T. The role of schizotypy in the study of the etiology of schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Schizophr Bull 2015;41:S408–S416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrantes-Vidal, N, Gross, G, Sheinbaum, T, Mitjavila, M, Ballespí, S, Kwapil, TR. Positive and negative schizotypy are associated with prodromal and schizophrenia-spectrum symptoms. Schizophr Res 2013;145:50–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bentall, RP, Claridge, G, Slade, PD. The multidimensional nature of schizotypal traits: a factor analytic study with normal subjects. Br J Clin Psychol 1989;28:363–375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burch, GSJ, Steel, C, Hemsley, DR. Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences: reliability in an experimental population. Br J Clin Psychol 1998;37(1):107–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, B. Testing for multigroup equivalence of a measuring instrument: a walk through the process. Psicothema 2008;20:872–882.Google ScholarPubMed
Byrne, BM, Shavelson, RJ, Muthén, B. Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychol Bull 1989;105:456–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cella, M, Serra, M, Lai, A, Mason, OJ, Sisti, D, Rocchi, MB, et al.Schizotypal traits in adolescents: links to family history of psychosis and psychological distress. Eur Psychiatry 2013;28:247–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cicero, DC, Martin, EA, Becker, TM, Docherty, AR, Kerns, JG. Correspondence between psychometric and clinical high risk for psychosis in an undergraduate population. Psychol Assessment 2014;26:901–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claridge, GSchizotypy:. Implications for illness and health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochrane, M, Petch, I, Pickering, AD. Do measures of schizotypal personality provide non-clinical analogues of schizophrenic symptomatology?. Psychiatry Res 2010;176:150–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, A, Mohr, C, Ettinger, U, Chan, RCK, Park, S. Schizotypy as an organizing framework for social and affective sciences. Schizophr Bull 2015;41:S427–S435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, AS, Matthews, RA, Najolia, GM, Brown, LA. Toward a more psychometrically sound brief measure of schizotypal traits: introducing the SPQ-Brief Revised. J Pers Disord 2010;24:516–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, GW, Rensvold, RB. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equ Modeling 2002;9(2):233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chmielewski, M, Fernandes, LO, Yee, CM, Miller, GA. Ethnicity and gender in scales of psychosis proneness and mood disorders. J Abn Psychology 1995;104:464–470.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Debbané, M, Eliez, S, Badoud, D, Conus, P, Flückiger, R, Schultze-Lutter, F. Developing psychosis and its risk states through the lens of schizotypy. Schizophr Bull 2015;41:S396–S407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ettinger, U, Meyhöfer, I, Steffens, M, Wagner, M, Koutsouleris, N. Genetics, cognition, and neurobiology of schizotypal personality: a review of the overlap with schizophrenia. Front Psychiatry 2014;5:18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ettinger, U, Mohr, C, Gooding, D, Cohen, A, Rapp, A, Haenschel, C, et al.Cognition and brain function in schizotypy: a selective review. Schizophr Bull 2015;41:S417–S426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fonseca-Pedrero, E, Compton, M, Tone, EB, Ortuño-Sierra, J, Paino, M, Fumero, A, et al.Cross-cultural invariance of the factor structure of the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire across Spanish and American college students. Psychiatry Res 2014;30:1071–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonseca-Pedrero, E, Fumero, A, Paino, M, de Miguel, A, Ortuño-Sierra, J, Lemos Giraldez, S, et al.Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire: new sources of validity evidence in college students. Psychiatry Res 2014;219:214–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fonseca-Pedrero, E, Menéndez, LF, Paino, M, Lemos-Girádez, S, Muñiz, J. Development of a computerized adaptive test for schizotypy assessment. PLoS One 2013;8(9):e73201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fonseca-Pedrero, E, Ortuño-Sierra, J, Mason, O, Muñiz, J. The Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences short version: further validation. Pers Indiv Differ 2015;86:338–343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonseca-Pedrero, E, Paino, M, Santarén-Rosell, M, Lemos-Giráldez, S, Muñiz, J. Psychometric properties of the Peters et al. delusions inventory 21 in college students. Compr Psychiatry 2012;53:893–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, GM, Mellin, J, Silvia, PJ, Barrantes-Vidal, N, Kwapil, TR. Comparing the factor structure of the Wisconsin Schizotypy Scales and the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire. Personal Disord 2014;5:397–405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hu, LT, Bentler, PM. Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling 1999;6:1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, LC, Nazroo, JY, Bebbington, P, Kuipers, E. Ocurrence of hallucinatory experiences in a community sample and ethnic variations. Br J Psychiatry 2002;180:174–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwapil, TR. A longitudinal study of drug and alcohol use by psychosis-prone and impulsive-nonconforming individuals. J Abn Psychology 1996;105:114–123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kwapil, TR, Barrantes-Vidal, N. Schizotypy: looking back and moving forward. Schizophrenia Bull 2015;41:S366–S373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kwapil, TR, Ros-Morente, A, Silvia, PJ, Barrantes-Vidal, N. Factor invariance of psychometric schizotypy in Spanish and American samples. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 2012;34:145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larøi, F, Luhrmann, TM, Bell, V, Christian, WAJ, Deshpande, S, Fernyhough, C, et al.Culture and hallucinations: overview and future directions. Schizophr Bull 2014;40:S213–S220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lenzenweger, MF. Current status of the scientific study of the personality disorders: an overview of epidemiological, longitudinal, experimental psychopathology, and neurobehavioral perspectives. Am Psychoanal Assoc 2010;58:741–778.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liddle, P. The symptoms of chronic schizophrenia: a re-examination of the positive-negative dichotomy. Br J Psychiatry 1987;151:145–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, A, Wigman, JT, Nelson, B, Wood, SJ, Vollebergh, WA, van Os, J, et al.Follow-up factor structure of schizotypy and its clinical associations in a help-seeking sample meeting ultra-high risk for psychosis criteria at baseline. Compr Psychiatry 2013;54:173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linscott, RJ, van Os, J. An updated and conservative systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological evidence on psychotic experiences in children and adults: on the pathway from proneness to persistence to dimensional expression across mental disorders. Psychol Med 2013;43:1133–1149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lorenzo-Seva, U, Ferrando, PJ. FACTOR 9.2: a comprehensive program for fitting exploratory and semiconfirmatory factor analysis and IRT models. Appl Psych Meas 2013;37:497–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, O. The assessment of schizotypy and its clinical relevance. Schizophr Bull 2015;41:S374–S385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, O, Claridge, G. The Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences (O-LIFE): further description and extended norms. Schizophr Res 2006;82(2):203–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, O, Claridge, G, Jackson, M. New scales for the assessment of schizotypy. Pers Indiv Differ 1995;18:7–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, O, Linney, Y, Claridge, G. Short scales for measuring schizotypy. Schizophr Res 2005;78(2):293–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meehl, PE. Toward an integrated theory of schizotaxia, schizotypy, and schizophrenia. J Pers Disord 1990;4(1):1–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meredith, W. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika 1993;58:525–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muñiz, J, Elosua, P, Hambleton, RK. Directrices para la traducción y adaptación de los tests: segunda edición [International Test Commission Guidelines for test translation and adaptation: Second edition]. Psicothema 2013;25:151–157.Google Scholar
Muthén, BO, Asparouhov, T Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus. Mplus Web Note No. 4, at http://www.statmodel.com/mplus/examples/webnote.html 2002.Google Scholar
Muthén, LK, Muthén, BOMplus user's guide, Seventh edition, Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 1998–2012.Google Scholar
Nuevo, R, Chatterji, S, Verdes, E, Naidoo, N, Arango, C, Ayuso-Mateos, JL. The continuum of psychotic symptoms in the general population: a cross-national study. Schizophr Bull 2012;38:475–485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortuño-Sierra, J, Badoud, D, Knecht, F, Paino, M, Eliez, S, Fonseca-Pedrero, E, et al.Testing Measurement Invariance of the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire-Brief Scores across Spanish and Swiss Adolescents. PLoS One 2013;8(12):e82041.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raine, A. The SPQ: a scale for the assessment of schizotypal personality based on DSM-III-R criteria. Schizophr Bull 1991;17:555–564.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raine, A. Schizotypal personality: neurodevelopmental and psychosocial trajectories. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2006;2:291–326.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reise, SP, Waller, NG. Item response theory and clinical measurement. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2009;5:27–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sierro, G, Rossier, J, Mason, O, Mohr, C French Validation of the O-LIFE Short Questionnaire. Eur J PsycholAssess [in press].Google Scholar
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences SPSS Base 15. 0 User's Guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc; 2006.Google Scholar
World Medical Association, World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013;310:2191–2194.Google Scholar
Zumbo, BD, Gadermann, AM, Zeisser, COrdinal versions of coefficients alpha and theta for Likert rating scales. J Mod Appl Stat Meth 2007;6:21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.