Delusion or Conspiracy? How Forensic Mental Health Professionals Differentiate Delusional Beliefs From Extreme Radicalized Beliefs

4Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A growing body of research is beginning to highlight the difficulty clinicians have in distinguishing delusional beliefs from conspiratorial beliefs. This mixed-methods study examined how 198 forensic mental health professionals in Canada and the United States differentiate delusional beliefs from conspiratorial beliefs. Participants were presented with an experimental vignette describing a forensic patient’s symptoms and were asked to diagnose the individual and, if qualified, opine on the defendant’s competency to stand trial. Results showed that idiosyncratic and highly rigid and distressing beliefs significantly predicted the diagnosis of a psychotic disorder, whereas shared beliefs held with low/moderate rigidity and distress significantly predicted the identification of conspiratorial beliefs. Despite participants’ abilities to differentiate delusional and conspiratorial beliefs, some participants reported that they lacked sufficient training in this area. Future research should examine if factors other than the social context and rigidity of the belief influence the differentiation of delusional and conspiratorial beliefs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aminot, K., Ryan, T. J., & Nijdam-Jones, A. (2024). Delusion or Conspiracy? How Forensic Mental Health Professionals Differentiate Delusional Beliefs From Extreme Radicalized Beliefs. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 51(10), 1548–1569. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548241262490

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free