Measurement Invariance of the Revised-Green Paranoid Thought Scale Across Black and White Americans

Abstract

Given the culturally diverse landscape of mental healthcare and research, ensuring that our psychological constructs are measured equivalently across diverse populations is critical. One construct for which there is significant potential for inequitable assessment is paranoia, a prominent feature in psychotic disorders that can also be driven by culture and racial marginalization. This study examined measurement invariance-an analytic technique to rigorously investigate whether a given construct is being measured similarly across groups-of the Revised-Green Paranoid Thought Scale (R-GPTS; Freeman et al., 2021) across Black and White Americans in the general population. Racial group differences in self-reported paranoia were also examined. The analytic sample consisted of 480 non-Hispanic White and 459 non-Hispanic Black Americans. Analyses demonstrated full invariance (i.e., configural, metric, and scalar invariance) of the R-GPTS across groups, indicating that the R-GPTS appropriately captures self-reported paranoia between Black and White Americans. Accordingly, it is reasonable to compare group endorsement: Black participants endorsed significantly higher scores on both the ideas of reference and ideas of persecution subscales of the R-GPTS (Mean ± SD = 10.91 ± 7.12 versus 8.21 ± 7.17 and Mean ± SD = 10.18 ± 10.03 versus 6.35 ± 8.35, for these subscales respectively). Generalized linear modeling revealed that race remained a large and statistically significant predictor of R-GPTS total score (β = -0.38756, p < 0.001) after controlling for relevant demographic factors (e.g., sex, age). This study addresses a critical gap within the existing literature as it establishes that elevations in paranoia exhibited by Black Americans in the R-GPTS reflect actual differences between groups rather than measurement artifacts.