The Dimensional Structure of the Wisconsin Schizotypy Scales: Factor Identification and Construct Validity

By Thomas R. Kwapil, N. Barrantes-Vidal, Paul J Silvia. 2007

304 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Psychiatry and Mental health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7e3c1768e5916e9151ed9db02fece6bf5fc50f6f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

1. Colin G. DeYoung
2. Jordan B. Peterson
3. Rachael G. Grazioplene
4. Paul J Silvia
5. Scott Barry Kaufman
6. J. Rushton
7. P. Irwing
8. Emily C. Nusbaum

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Colin G. DeYoung
2. Jordan B. Peterson
3. Rachael G. Grazioplene
4. Scott Barry Kaufman
5. Paul J Silvia
6. Emily C. Nusbaum
7. James C. Kaufman
8. Jan Cieciuch

In Psychiatry and Mental health

1. Colin G. DeYoung
2. Jordan B. Peterson

Citations in the corpus

• From madness to genius: The Openness/Intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex (2012, background): “Previous research shows that positive schizotypy is positively related to Openness/Intellect, whereas negative schizotypy is negatively related to Openness/Intellect (Kwapil et al., 2008; Ross, Lutz, & Bailley, 2002).”
• Brief assessment of schizotypy: Developing short forms of the Wisconsin Schizotypy Scales (2011, unknown): “Over the decades, the scales have been used in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of normal, at-risk, and deviant samples, and an impressive amount of evidence has accumulated in support of their score validity (see Chapman, Chapman, & Kwapil, 1995; Kwapil et al., 2008).”