Background Some individuals may manifest psychotic symptoms that do not fulfill the requisite clinical criteria for a formal diagnosis of psychosis. The assessment of susceptibility to delusions, encompassing both clinical and non-clinical cohorts, frequently makes use of the Peters et al. Delusions Inventory (PDI-40). This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Persian version of Peters et al. Delusions Inventory (PDI-40) in Iranian non-clinical and clinical samples. Methods The present study employed a cross-sectional, correlational design in 2020. A total of 1402 Iranian participants were recruited for the study, which consisted of three distinct stages. The first stage involved an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) conducted on a non-clinical sample of 512 participants. The second stage comprising different non-clinical sample 764 participants to perform a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). In the third stage, a clinical sample of 126 psychotic patients was compared to a non-clinical sample. All participants completed the PDI-40, the Community Assessment of Psychotic Experiences (CAPE-42), and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21). The internal structure of PDI-40 was examined through the analysis of its factor structure using LISREL 8.8. Results The EFA analysis unveiled nine components within Persian version of PDI-40. The CFA analysis demonstrated an excellent fit of the nine-factor structure of Persian PDI-40 to the data. The total score exhibited high internal reliability, as indicated by Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.92. Moreover, Persian PDI-40 exhibited satisfactory evidence of convergent validity, as significant correlations were observed between dimensions of PDI-40 and subscales of CAPE-42 and DASS-21. Lastly, findings indicated that psychotic participants scored higher than non-clinical participants in all components of the PDI-40(p < 0.05). Conclusion Persian version of the PDI-40 demonstrates strong reliability and validity for assessing delusion proneness in both non-clinical and clinical samples in Iran. The observed distinctions between psychotic and non-clinical participants underscore its potential as a valuable tool for discerning delusion proneness in diverse contexts.

Keywords