IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v8y2018i4p2158244018817129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reliability, Validity, and Factorial Structure of the Farsi Version of the Paranoia Checklist With Iranian Students

Author

Listed:
  • Leila Amirpour
  • Mahboubeh Dadfar
  • Majid Heydari Charvadeh
  • Behrooz Birashk

Abstract

Paranoid thought is one of the most common symptoms in psychiatric disorders. The Paranoia Checklist is a brief screening and diagnostic tool for clinical and subclinical paranoia. It has been used in research, clinical, and non-clinical settings. The Paranoia Checklist has not had its validity examined in university settings in Iran. A cross-sectional study was conducted to investigate the validation of the Farsi version of Paranoia Checklist in a randomized cluster sample of 365 Iranian volunteer college students selected from the Payame Noor University of Mashhad in Iran. They completed the Paranoia Checklist, the General Paranoia Scale, and the Symptom Checklist 90 Revised (SCL-90-R). The mean score of the Paranoia Checklist was 35.50 ( SD = 7.21). The Cronbach’s α for the Paranoia Checklist was .87, indicating high internal consistency. The Paranoia Checklist correlated .42 with the General Paranoia Scale, .38 with the SCL-90-R subscales of Anxiety (ANX), Hostility (HOS), and Paranoia Ideation (PAR), and .37 with the Interpersonal Sensitivity (INTS), denoting moderate construct and criterion-related validity. The results of the factor analysis of the Paranoia Checklist identified three factors associated with the paranoid thoughts. The Paranoia Checklist has a multidimensional structure, and adequate validity and reliability. It can be used in the non-clinical, clinical, and research settings to measure paranoia in Iran.

Suggested Citation

  • Leila Amirpour & Mahboubeh Dadfar & Majid Heydari Charvadeh & Behrooz Birashk, 2018. "Reliability, Validity, and Factorial Structure of the Farsi Version of the Paranoia Checklist With Iranian Students," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(4), pages 21582440188, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:4:p:2158244018817129
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244018817129
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244018817129
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244018817129?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leslie E Horton & Neus Barrantes-Vidal & Paul J Silvia & Thomas R Kwapil, 2014. "Worries about Being Judged versus Being Harmed: Disentangling the Association of Social Anxiety and Paranoia with Schizotypy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-8, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:4:p:2158244018817129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.