ArticleSchizophrenia research. Cognition2026
Interpretation of ambiguous and unambiguous idiomatic statements in high and low schizotypal individuals.
Article in Schizophrenia research. Cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adopting a continuum perspective, this study examined figurative language comprehension in individuals with high or low levels of schizotypy within a non-clinical population. We investigated whether difficulties in figurative language processing are specifically driven by the presence of a competing literal interpretation. We hypothesized that higher schizotypy would be associated with fewer figurative responses and more literal and concrete responses for ambiguous idioms only, with no comparable effect for unambiguous idioms. A total of 377 French-speaking adults from the general population completed an idiom comprehension task and the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire (SPQ). Based on total SPQ scores, 139 participants were included in the group analyses (73 high schizotypy, 66 low schizotypy). The task combined two methodological approaches previously examined separately by including both ambiguous and unambiguous idioms while distinguishing figurative, literal, and concrete response options. Participants with high schizotypy produced significantly fewer figurative responses and significantly more concrete responses than those with low schizotypy, whereas no difference was observed for literal responses. Importantly, these group differences were found regardless of idiom ambiguity, indicating that they were not specifically driven by the presence of a competing literal interpretation. These findings suggest that reduced figurative interpretations in schizotypy cannot be explained solely by competition from a plausible literal interpretation. More importantly, they highlight that distinguishing literal from concrete response options may help clarify previous inconsistencies in figurative language research in schizotypy and schizophrenia.
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.