Measuring Paranoid Beliefs in Adolescents: A Comparison of the Revised-Green et al.'s Paranoid Thoughts Scale (R-GPTS) and the Bird Checklist of Adolescent Paranoia (B-CAP)

B. Schlier,L. Ellett,E. Thompson,B. Gaudiano,K. Krkovic,J. L. Kingston
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-024-01187-9
2024-04-04
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
Abstract:Research on paranoid beliefs in adolescents is in its infancy. Valid and reliable assessments are essential to advancing the field, yet there is no current consensus as to which are optimal to use in this population. This study compared the psychometric properties of two measures of paranoia in a general population adolescent sample. A cross-sectional study with quota sampling (gender and age) recruited adolescents (14–17 years) from the UK (n = 262) and USA (n = 200), who completed the Revised Green et al. Paranoid Thoughts Scale (R-GPTS) and the Bird Checklist for Adolescent Paranoia (B-CAP). We assessed factor structures, intercorrelations, overlap of participants identified as at-risk for paranoid thoughts via both scales, convergent validity (scales with one another) and discriminant validity (distress, wellbeing, bullying and discrimination). Both scales performed equally well in terms of factorial validity. Intercorrelations between the subscales and with general distress were high for both measures. However, a substantial percentage of participants were identified as having paranoid beliefs according to the R-GPTS but not the B-CAP. Furthermore, the B-CAP showed a very high correlations (0.69 ≤ r ≤ 0.79) with self-reported bullying experiences, which bordered on multicollinearity. Findings highlight the possibility that B-CAP may risk confounding paranoid beliefs with exposure to bullying more so than R-GPTS, and that B-CAP may miss instances of elevated paranoia that are captured by the R-GPTS. Future research needs to further explore this by validating both scales with an external (e.g., interview-based) criterion for paranoia.
psychology, clinical, developmental
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
### Problems the Paper Aims to Address This paper aims to compare the psychometric properties of two psychological measurement tools used to assess paranoid beliefs in adolescents—the Revised Green et al.'s Paranoid Thoughts Scale (R-GPTS) and the Bird Checklist of Adolescent Paranoia (B-CAP)—in a general adolescent population. Specifically, the study seeks to address the following issues: 1. **Validity of Factor Structure**: Testing whether the factor structures of these two scales conform to expectations through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). 2. **Correlation and Overlap Between Scales**: Evaluating the correlation between subscales of R-GPTS and B-CAP, as well as the overlap of high-risk paranoid beliefs identified by the critical values of both scales. 3. **Convergent and Discriminant Validity**: Assessing the performance of these two scales in terms of convergent validity (correlation with variables such as mental health, bullying, and discrimination) and discriminant validity (ability to distinguish between overall mental health, well-being, bullying, and discrimination). ### Background and Significance Research on paranoid beliefs in adolescents is still in its early stages, and effective assessment tools are crucial for understanding their prevalence, nature, and impact. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal assessment tool. R-GPTS is one of the most effective and accurate questionnaires for paranoid beliefs in adults, while B-CAP is specifically designed to assess paranoid beliefs in adolescents. By comparing these two scales, the study hopes to provide more reliable methods for assessing paranoid beliefs in adolescents.