Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24903416›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2014

Interdisciplinary approaches to the phenomenology of auditory verbal hallucinations.

Angela Woods, Nev Jones, Marco Bernini, Felicity Callard, Ben Alderson-Day, Johanna C Badcock, Vaughan Bell, Chris C H Cook, Thomas Csordas, Clara Humpston and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. An Introduction to Engaged Phenomenology.JBSP : the journal of the British Society for Phenomenology. British Society for Phenomenology · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. On shame and voice-hearing.Medical humanities · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Angela WoodsCentre for Medical Humanities, School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Durham, UK; angela.woods@durham.ac.uk.
Nev JonesLived Experience Research Network, Chicago, IL;
Marco BerniniDepartment of English Studies, Durham University, Durham, UK;
Felicity CallardCentre for Medical Humanities, Department of Geography, Durham University, Durham, UK;
Ben Alderson-DayDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK;
Johanna C BadcockSchool of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia;
Vaughan BellInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychosis Studies, King's College London, London, UK;
Chris C H CookDepartment of Theology and Religion, Durham University, Durham, UK;
Thomas CsordasDepartment of Anthropology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA;
Clara HumpstonInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychosis Studies, King's College London, London, UK;
Joel KruegerDepartment of Sociology, Philosophy and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK;
Frank LarøiDepartment of Psychology: Cognition and Behaviour, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium;
Simon McCarthy-JonesARC Centre of Excellence in Cognitions and Its Disorders, Department of Cognitive Science, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia;
Peter MoseleyDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK;
Hilary PowellCentre for Medical Humanities, Department of English Studies, Durham University, Durham, UK;
Andrea RaballoDepartment of Mental Health and Pathological Addiction, AUSL Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
David SmailesDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK;
Charles FernyhoughDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK;

Funding

Wellcome Trust 086049Wellcome Trust 098455Wellcome Trust WT098455MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the recent proliferation of scientific, clinical, and narrative accounts of auditory verbal hallucinations (AVHs), the phenomenology of voice hearing remains opaque and undertheorized. In this article, we outline an interdisciplinary approach to understanding hallucinatory experiences which seeks to demonstrate the value of the humanities and social sciences to advancing knowledge in clinical research and practice. We argue that an interdisciplinary approach to the phenomenology of AVH utilizes rigorous and context-appropriate methodologies to analyze a wider range of first-person accounts of AVH at 3 contextual levels: (1) cultural, social, and historical; (2) experiential; and (3) biographical. We go on to show that there are significant potential benefits for voice hearers, clinicians, and researchers. These include (1) informing the development and refinement of subtypes of hallucinations within and across diagnostic categories; (2) "front-loading" research in cognitive neuroscience; and (3) suggesting new possibilities for therapeutic intervention. In conclusion, we argue that an interdisciplinary approach to the phenomenology of AVH can nourish the ethical core of scientific enquiry by challenging its interpretive paradigms, and offer voice hearers richer, potentially more empowering ways to make sense of their experiences.

Indexed as

CultureSocial EnvironmentCooperative BehaviorHallucinationsHumanitiesHumansModels, PsychologicalResearchSocial Sciencesauditory verbal hallucinationsinterdisciplinarityphenomenologypsychosisresearch collaboration

Identifiers

PMID24903416
PMCPMC4141308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.