ArticlePersonality disorders2014
Sex differences in magical ideation: a community-based twin study.
Article in Personality disorders, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of hallucinogen persisting perception disorder and thought disturbance symptoms following psychedelic use.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Measurement invariance across age, gender, ethnicity, and psychopathology of the Psychotic-Like Experiences Questionnaire for Children in a community sample.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2023Article
- Cognitive Gain or Handicap: Magical Ideation and Self-Absorption in Clinical and Non-clinical Participants.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Cognitive Empathy as Imagination: Evidence From Reading the Mind in the Eyes in Autism and Schizotypy.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Replication of Associations With Psychotic-Like Experiences in Middle Childhood From the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2020Article
- Assessment of the Prodromal Questionnaire-Brief Child Version for Measurement of Self-reported Psychoticlike Experiences in Childhood.JAMA psychiatry · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Two questions regarding sex differences in magical ideation were investigated in this study: (1) whether there are mean-level sex differences on the Magical Ideation Scale (MIS), and (2) whether there are quantitative and/or qualitative sex differences in the genetic contributions to variation on this scale. These questions were evaluated using data obtained from a large community sample of adult Australian twins (N = 4,355) that included opposite-sex pairs. Participants completed a modified 15-item version of the MIS within a larger assessment battery. Women reported both higher means and variability on the MIS than men; this was also observed within families (in opposite-sex twin pairs). Biometric modeling indicated that the proportion of variation in MIS scores due to genetic influences (indicating quantitative sex differences) and the specific latent genetic contributions to this variation (indicating qualitative sex differences) were the same in men and women. These findings clarify the nature of sex differences in magical ideation and point to avenues for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.