Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • AAPL

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
  • AAPL
  • Alerts
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
OtherREGULAR ARTICLE

Abnormal Attentions Toward The British Royal Family: Factors Associated With Approach and Escalation

David V. James, J. Reid Meloy, Paul E. Mullen, Michele T. Pathé, Frank R. Farnham, Lulu F. Preston and Brian J. Darnley
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online September 2010, 38 (3) 329-340;
David V. James
MB, BS, MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Reid Meloy
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul E. Mullen
MB, BS, DSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michele T. Pathé
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frank R. Farnham
MB, BS, BSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lulu F. Preston
MA, DClinPsych
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian J. Darnley
MB, BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Table 1

    Escalation and Characteristics of Communication

    Communication, No Approach n = 53Communication and Approach Group Compared With Communication, No Approach Group n (%)χ2, pφOdds Ratio (95% CI)Comparison of Breach Against No Breach
    All Cases n = 79No Breach Activity n = 53Breach Activity n = 26
    Sex, male29 (60.4)56 (70.0)36 (67.9)19 (73.1)
    NSNSNSNS
    0.0980.0780.1270.047
    Ethnic minority*17 (22.1)14 (28.0)3 (11.5)NS
    −0.181
    Age*41.7 (SD 12.8)41.0 (SD 13.3)42.5 (SD 12.3)NS
    Form of communication
        More than one method2 (3.8)20 (25.0)12 (22.6)8 (30.8)
    10.405, 0.0018.230, 0.00411.498, exact 0.002NS
    0.2800.2790.3810.092
    8.476 (1.894–34.46)7.463 (1.580–35.714)11.363 (2.178–58.825)
        Multiple contacts26 (49.1)63 (78.8)41 (77.4)22 (84.6)
    12.697, 0.0009.127, 0.0039.251, 0.002NS
    0.3090.2930.3420.099
    3.846 (1.802–8.197)3.546 (1.534–8.197)5.714 (1.730–18.868)
        Telephone calls4 (7.5)22 (27.8)13 (24.5)8 (32.0)
    8.265, 0.0045.675, 0.0177.803, exact 0.015NS
    0.2500.2310.3160.063
    4.717 (1.524–14.706)3.984 (1.203–13.158)5.780 (1.538–21.739)
        Also sent communications to a nonroyal9 (17.0)26 (32.5)14 (26.4)11 (42.3)
    3.960, 0.047NS5.918, 0.015NS
    0.1730.1140.7420.145
    2.353 (1.001–5.556)3.584 (1.245–10.309)
    Language of communication
        Threatening8 (15.1)8 (10.0)1 (1.9)6 (23.1)
    NS5.950, exact 0.031NS7.319, exact 0.023
    −0.077−0.2370.0980.302
    0.108 (0.013–0.898)7.800 (1.452–41.908)
        Demand13 (24.5)26 (32.5)15 (28.3)11 (42.3)
    NSNSNSNS
    0.0860.0430.1820.194
        Abusive9 (17.0)5 (6.3)2 (3.8)3 (11.5)
    3.898, 0.0484.970, 0.026NSNS
    −0.171−0.217−0.0710.152
    0.326 (0.103–0.999)0.192 (0.039–0.935)
    Content of communication
        Anger/hostility17 (32.1)15 (18.8)5 (9.4)9 (34.6)
    NS8.260, 0.004NS6.364, exact 0.016
    −0.153−0.2790.0250.282
    0.221 (0.074–0.654)4.235 (1.312–13.670)
        Requests for help13 (24.5)30 (37.5)20 (37.7)10 (38.5)
    NSNSNSNS
    0.1360.1430.1440.014
        Amorous feelings6 (11.3)16 (20.3)10 (18.9)6 (24.0)
    NSNSNSNS
    0.1170.1050.1640.063
        Offers of help7 (13.2)8 (10.1)5 (9.4)3 (12.0)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.048−0.060−0.0170.042
    Content of communication (Cont'd)
        Sexualized3 (5.7)1 (1.3)1 (1.9)0 (0.0)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.126−0.099−0.139−0.078
        Confused/rambling34 (64.2)43 (53.8)28 (52.8)15 (57.7)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.103−0.115−0.0630.055
    • * Insufficient data available.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Escalation, Mental State, and Motivation

    Communication, No Approach n = 53Communication and Approach Group Compared With Communication, No Approach Group n (%)χ2, pφOdds Ratio (95% CI)Comparison of Breach Against No Breach
    All Cases n = 79No Breach Activity n = 53Breach Activity n = 26
    Mental state
        Serious mental illness37 (69.8)73 (91.3)49 (92.5)23 (88.5)
    10.245, 0.0018.874, 0.003NSNS
    0.2780.2890.205−0.068
    4.505 (1.706–11.905)5.291 (1.634–17.241)
        Fixated on a person45 (84.9)72 (90.0)47 (88.7)24 (92.3)
    NSNSNSNS
    0.0770.0560.1050.053
        Fixated on a cause7 (13.2)9 (11.3)6 (11.3)3 (11.5)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.029−0.029−0.0240.006
        Deluded24 (45.3)66 (82.5)44 (83.0)21 (80.8)
    20.183, 0.00016.409, 0.0008.960, 0.003NS
    0.3900.3930.337−0.032
    5.682 (2.564–12.500)5.917 (2.404–14.493)5.747 (1.664–15.385)
        Grandiose14 (26.4)59 (73.8)40 (75.5)18 (69.2)NS
    28.847, 0.00025.519, 0.00013.269, 0.000−0.071
    0.4660.4910.410
    7.813 (3.559–17.241)8.547 (3.571–20.408)6.250 (2.232–17.544)
        Feeling persecuted11 (20.8)24 (30.0)21 (39.6)3 (11.5)
    NS4.476, 0.034NS6.252, 0.012,
    0.1030.205−0.113−0.280
    2.506 (1.058–5.952)0.205 (0.055–0.769)
        Incoherent/confused33 (62.3)45 (56.3)31 (58.5)14 (53.8)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.060−0.039−0.081−0.034
        Suicidal ideation0 (0.0)2 (2.5)1 (1.9)1 (3.8)
    NSNSNSNS
    0.1010.0980.1680.060
        Homicidal ideation5 (9.4)2 (2.5)1 (1.9)1 (3.8)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.152−0.163−0.0990.060
    Motivational type
        Delusions of royalty6 (11.3)24 (30.0)14 (26.4)9 (34.6)
    6.368, 0.0123.944, 0.0476.153, exact 0.029NS
    0.2190.1930.2790.070
    3.356 (1.266–8.923)2.809 (0.987–8.000)4.149 (1.282–13.333)
        Intimacy seekers7 (13.2)16 (20.0)8 (15.1)8 (30.8)
    NSNSNSNS
    0.0880.0270.2100.187
        Amity seekers4 (7.7)17 (21.8)13 (24.5)4 (16.7)
    4.581, 0.0325.483, 0.019NSNS
    0.1880.2290.136−0.083
    3.344 (1.056–10.638)3.906 (1.179–12.987)
        Royally persecuted2 (3.8)1 (1.3)1 (1.9)0 (0.0)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.084−0.059−0.112−0.076
        Querulants3 (5.8)3 (3.8)1 (1.9)2 (8.3)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.045−0.1010.0480.156
    Motivational type (Cont’d)
        Seeking help/sanctuary7 (13.5)7 (9)7 (13.5)0 (0.0)
    NSNSNSNS
    −0.0710.004−0.216−0.209
        Counselors14 (26.9)6 (7.7)6 (11.3)0 (0.0)
    8.864, 0.0034.144, 0.0427.921 exact 0.003NS
    −0.261−0.199−0.323−0.192
    0.226 (0.080–0.636)0.347 (0.122–0.988)0.613 (0.503–0.747)
        Chaotic9 (17.3)4 (5.1)3 (5.7)1 (4.2)
    5.142, 0.023NSNSNS
    −0.199−0.183−0.181−0.029
    0.258 (0.075–0.889)
    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Logistic Regression and Goodness of Fit Statistics

    Logistic Regression Model for Escalation
    βWaldpOR95% CI
    Multiple communications1.0025.213.0222.7231.15–6.436
    Grandiosity1.91220.428.0006.7692.954–15.512
    Multiple means of communication1.6323.869.0495.1131.006–25.993
    Constant−7.72118.412.000.000
    Goodness of fit statistics
    χ2dfp
    Model42.7230.000
    Hosmer-Lemeshow3.05540.549
    Nagelkerke R20.372
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online: 38 (3)
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
Vol. 38, Issue 3
September 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in recommending The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law site.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Abnormal Attentions Toward The British Royal Family: Factors Associated With Approach and Escalation
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Abnormal Attentions Toward The British Royal Family: Factors Associated With Approach and Escalation
David V. James, J. Reid Meloy, Paul E. Mullen, Michele T. Pathé, Frank R. Farnham, Lulu F. Preston, Brian J. Darnley
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Sep 2010, 38 (3) 329-340;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Abnormal Attentions Toward The British Royal Family: Factors Associated With Approach and Escalation
David V. James, J. Reid Meloy, Paul E. Mullen, Michele T. Pathé, Frank R. Farnham, Lulu F. Preston, Brian J. Darnley
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Sep 2010, 38 (3) 329-340;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • A Forensic Science-Based Model for Identifying and Mitigating Forensic Mental Health Expert Biases
  • Predictors of Child and Parent Offender Removal in Incidents of Child Neglect in U.S. Army Families
  • A Pilot Analysis Investigating the Use of AI in Malingering
Show more Regular Article

Similar Articles

Site Navigation

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Information for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts

Other Resources

  • Academy Website
  • AAPL Meetings
  • AAPL Annual Review Course

Reviewers

  • Peer Reviewers

Other Publications

  • AAPL Practice Guidelines
  • AAPL Newsletter
  • AAPL Ethics Guidelines
  • AAPL Amicus Briefs
  • Landmark Cases

Customer Service

  • Cookie Policy
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Order Physical Copy

Copyright © 2025 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law