Measles, magic and misidentifications: a defence of the two-factor theory of delusions

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

33 Downloads (Pure)


Corlett (this issue) provides a robust critique of the two-factor theory of delusions. The heart of his critique is two challenges he derives from a paper by Tranel and Damasio (1994), who illuminate the autonomic responses and brain damage of four patients often cited in support of the two-factor theory of Capgras delusion. I defend the two-factor theory against Corlett’s two key challenges, arguing that his first challenge has been previously addressed, and that his second challenge is overstated. In my view, these challenges do not negate the two-factor account. Nevertheless, two-factor theorists – and computational psychiatrists – should continue to devise and test falsifiable predictions of their respective theories.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)183-190
Number of pages8
JournalCognitive Neuropsychiatry
Issue number3
Early online date16 Apr 2019
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 16 Apr 2019

Cite this