Pathological public figure preoccupation: Its relationship with dissociation and absorption

Abstract

This paper introduces the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory (PFPI), bridging the theoretical and empirical gap between ‘everyday’ celebrity worship and unhealthy preoccupation with a celebrity or other public figure. In Study 1, 1162 respondents completed the 50-item PFPI, where items relate to attitudes and behaviours towards a favourite celebrity. Based on factor analytic techniques a model of public figure preoccupation was devised. In a second study (N = 215), the new model was then compared to disassociation and absorption scores to provide a greater clinical understanding of public figure preoccupation and its psychological correlates.

Full text

Pathological public figure preoccupation: Its relationship
with dissociation and absorption
Lorraine Sheridan
*
, John Maltby, Raphael Gillett
School of Psychology, Forensic Section, University of Leicester, 106 New Walk, Leicester,
LE1 7EA, United Kingdom
Received 14 November 2005; received in revised form 21 February 2006; accepted 28 February 2006
Available online 17 April 2006
Abstract
This paper introduces the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory (PFPI), bridging the theoretical and
empirical gap between ‘everyday’ celebrity worship and unhealthy preoccupation with a celebrity or other
public figure. In Study 1, 1162 respondents completed the 50-item PFPI, where items relate to attitudes and
behaviours towards a favourite celebrity. Based on factor analytic techniques a model of public figure pre-
occupation was devised. In a second study (N= 215), the new model was then compared to disassociation
and absorption scores to provide a greater clinical understanding of public figure preoccupation and its psy-
chological correlates.
Ó2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Celebrity worship; Stalking; Pathological; Disassociation and absorption
1. Introduction
It is widely accepted that public interest, and the resultant research interest in stalking, was trig-
gered by cases of celebrity harassment. Several hundred empirical reports, theoretical works, com-
mentaries, reviews and case studies now exist in relation to stalking, yet a very small proportion of
0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.02.010
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 116 252 2460; fax: +44 116 252 3994.
E-mail addresses: Lorraine.Sheridan@le.ac.uk,lph1@le.ac.uk (L. Sheridan).
www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535

these directly examine those who target celebrities. This is of course a positive aspect of the stalk-
ing literature, since the vast majority of stalking victims are not public figures, and most interven-
tionist professionals who follow the literature will not be working with celebrity stalkers or
victims. Even so, those who target celebrities do require our attention and stalking-related re-
search has now reached the point, where examinations of specific sub-populations are viable.
The current work seeks to develop a scale, the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory, with the
aim of measuring the extent to which an individual harbours an unhealthy interest in a preferred
celebrity.
In 1991, Dietz and colleagues conducted two separate studies, analysing threatening and other
inappropriate letters that had been sent to Hollywood celebrities and to US Congress members,
respectively (Dietz, Matthews, Martell et al., 1991a; Dietz, Matthews, Van Duyne et al., 1991b).
Although communications sent to entertainers and to politicians did differ—principally in respect
of the former group receiving more romantic messages and the latter more violent messages—key
similarities between the two groups of letter writers were observed. In particular, both sets of pub-
lic figures received high volume amounts of unsolicited, inappropriate and threatening post, as
well as a large number of inappropriate visits, mainly from persons displaying signs of psychiatric
disorder.
In the Netherlands, Malsch, Visscher, and Blaauw (2002) analysed questionnaire and interview
data from public figures who had experienced ‘repeated harassment originating from an obsession
with the victim as a public figure’. Thirty-five of the 105 public figures were judged to have been
stalked and the most common harassment methods were telephone calls, letters, faxes and e-mails,
the sending of flowers and gifts, physical following, surveillance of the victim’s home and harass-
ment of family and friends. A general finding was that the stalkers of politicians tended to remain
distant, whilst the stalkers of those in the entertainment world were more likely to physically pur-
sue their target.
It would be erroneous, however, to view negatively most of the thousands of individuals who
seek direct contact with a favourite celebrity each year. Fan mail to a single Hollywood celebrity
was analysed by Leets, de Becker, and Giles (1995), who categorised letter writers into three
groups: the curious who sought specific information, those who wished to express adulation
and persons who wanted to request autographs or items for fund-raising purposes. Ferris
(2001) observed and interviewed ‘active fans’ who differ from ordinary viewers in that their pur-
suits go beyond consumption, they form social networks with other fans, and they are devoted to
a single ‘popular culture product’. The fans were asked about ways in which they had sought to
contact a favourite celebrity. Ferris noted that although active fans may go to great lengths
to physically encounter a celebrity or to find out details about them (such as a home address), they
attempt to differentiate themselves from ‘stalkers’, at the same time recognising that their activities
and those of stalkers share many similarities. Indeed, one of the dominant themes of the stalking
literature concerns the difficulties inherent to defining the phenomenon (see e.g. Sheridan, Blaauw,
& Davies, 2003; Sheridan & Davies, 2001). Definitional issues have caused problems for legisla-
tors, in that there is no objective method available to unequivocally differentiate stalkers from
those who make misguided but innocuous, or even appropriate, attempts to make contact with
another person.
Horton and Wohl (1956) introduced the notion of a ‘para-social relationship’ between screen
characters or celebrities and those who view them. These authors suggested that the mass media
526 L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535

‘‘give the illusion of face-to-face relationship with the performer’’ (p. 215) and further suggested
that the performer and the audience are engaged in a ‘para-social interaction’ based on the ability
of the performer to appear to adjust his or her performance to a supposed audience response.
Celebrity worship is one manifestation of this broader phenomenon and the Celebrity Attitude
Scale is currently the closest measure available for measuring obsessive tendencies among fans
(CAS; McCutcheon, Lange, & Houran, 2002). By employing this scale, two apparently negative
orientations towards celebrities have been identified, namely ‘intense-personal’ and ‘borderline-
pathological’ (e.g. Maltby, Houran, Lange, Ashe, & McCutcheon, 2002). The intense-personal
aspect of celebrity worship reflects intensive and compulsive feelings about the celebrity (e.g.
‘I consider my favourite celebrity to be my soul mate’, ‘When something bad happens to my
favourite celebrity I feel like it happened to me’), while the borderline-pathological facet of cele-
brity worship is typified by uncontrollable behaviours and fantasies regarding scenarios involving
a favourite celebrity (‘My favourite celebrity and I have our own code so we can communicate
with each other secretly [such as over the TV or special words on the radio’]).
What is crucial to note, here, is the difference in the role of interaction with the celebrity when
comparing intense-personal and borderline-pathological dimensions of celebrity worship. Within
intense-personal aspects, the para-social relationship is passive and receptive on the part of the
celebrity worshipper whilst within the borderline-pathological dimension the worshipper believes
themselves involved in a relationship with the celebrity, with emphasis on how this may develop in
the future. These findings have demonstrated that individuals are preoccupied with and feel close
to celebrities to different degrees, but only to the extent of borderline behaviours. Certainly, work
on celebrity worship does not encompass the more obsessional behaviours described in the stalk-
ing literature and so there exists first the opportunity to extend present knowledge to more path-
ological dimensions of celebrity obsession.
The second opportunity is to explore pathological dimensions of celebrity obsession via clinical
personality measures. Studies of celebrity worship have typically used the absorption–addiction
hypothesis to guide research (McCutcheon et al., 2002). According to this model, more extreme
aspects of celebrity worship lead to a compromised identity structure in some individuals. This
in turn facilitates psychological absorption with a celebrity in an attempt to establish an identity
and a sense of fulfillment. The dynamics of the motivational forces driving this absorption might
take on an addictive component, leading to more extreme (and perhaps delusional) behaviours to
sustain the individual’s satisfaction with the para-social relationship. This view is supported by
recent evidence. Maltby, Day, McCutcheon, Houran, and Ashe (2006) found that intense-per-
sonal celebrity worship was significantly related to fantasy proneness (around 10% of the shared
variance), and borderline-pathological celebrity worship also shared a significant association with
fantasy proneness (14% of the shared variance) and dissociation (around 3% of the shared vari-
ance). The individual might not be able, therefore, to integrate his or her experiences, thoughts
and feelings in everyday consciousness and memory. Thus, as pathological dimensions of celebrity
preoccupation become more extreme they should be compared with a dissociation from everyday
experiences.
It may, however, be necessary to compare this interpretation of celebrity worship against an-
other measure. People who score high on absorption tend to fully engage with their interest
and demonstrate imagination, focus and order to thoughts and feelings associated with the object
of their attention (Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974). This is certainly consistent with formulations of
L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535 527

stalking. Although stalkers are not a homogeneous group in terms of their motivations and
behaviour by definition they are focussed on their target (see e.g. Boon & Sheridan, 2001; Mullen,
Pathe
´, & Purcell, 2000). Therefore the present formulation that higher levels of celebrity worship
represent difficulties to integrate feelings and information might not be entirely accurate. It may
be that among persons who show pathological dimensions of celebrity obsession, there is an abil-
ity to demonstrate a sharp focus on the object of attention (i.e. the celebrity or other public
figure).
Therefore, the present study addressed two aims. The first was to develop a measure of path-
ological dimensions of celebrity obsession. The second was to compare pathological dimensions of
celebrity obsession association with dissociative and absorbed behaviour.
2. Study 1
2.1. Method
2.1.1. Participant recruitment strategy
Previous studies have found the incidence of extreme celebrity worship among general popula-
tions to be relatively low. Maltby et al. (2006) have suggested that not only are large numbers of
respondents required, but also that certain populations need to be sought. An on-line question-
naire was set up and the website was mentioned on at least 20 internet-based fan forums, where
people interested in celebrities communicate and seek information on a favoured celebrity. Our
website was also mentioned by the mass media following a press release that did not state the de-
tails of the research being conducted, but invited members of the public to offer their opinions
concerning celebrities. Media coverage included: BBC on-line news; BBC World Service; numer-
ous regional and national radio programmes and newspapers; and music, lifestyle, and general
interest magazines in the UK, North America, Australia and mainland Europe. Each participant
was required to voluntarily follow a web link, access an on-line questionnaire and complete it.
2.1.2. Participant selection
A total of 1293 respondents were recruited. There were no missing data, as the on-line question-
naire did not allow incomplete responses to be submitted. However, 131 cases were excluded from
the analysis for any of four reasons. First, suspicious long runs of the same response, particularly
‘strongly agree’ responses, were excluded. Second, some respondents chose unsuitable celebrities
(e.g. their relatives, fictional characters) or were unable to choose a single favourite public figure.
Third, demographic data presented were suspicious and did not match up, e.g. an 18-year-old re-
ported being retired. Fourth, multiple submissions from the same IP address were treated as
suspicious.
2.1.3. Participants
Data from 1162 participants were included in the study, 384 males and 778 females, aged be-
tween 13 and 72 (mean age 29.62 years, SD 11.5) with the majority of respondents residing in
the UK (55.9%), the USA (24.4%), Canada and Australia (both 4.3%). The majority of respon-
dents were single (69.5%), white (78.2%) and students (51.9%).
528 L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535

2.1.4. The Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory
The research instrument was constructed specifically for this study. Respondents were asked to
identify a favourite ‘celebrity’, defined as a famous living person.
Fifty items were written to measure pathological dimensions of celebrity obsession (see Table 1).
There were two sources for these items; the first being media reports of court cases that have noted
the behaviour of those preoccupied with public figures. We also drew on the experience of one of
the authors who has intervened in cases where public figures have been targeted by potential stalk-
ers. All items were scored on a response format from 1 (‘Strongly Disagree’) to 5 (‘Strongly Agree’).
2.2. Results
All 1162 respondents were able to identify a favourite celebrity: 38.9% of the celebrities be-
longed to the acting profession, 30.6% were musicians, and 9.0% were sport figures, suggesting
the majority of participants selected people who had a perceived talent.
Responses to all 50 items were subjected to principal components analysis. As determining the
number of factors is crucial to the current consideration we used two criteria. The first was the use
of the scree test (Cattell, 1966) based on a plot of eigenvalues of the factors and choosing only
those factors that were above the elbow in the line of eigenvalues. The second criterion was a par-
allel analysis of Monte Carlo simulations (Horn, 1965) that allowed the comparison of the eigen-
values to those that might be expected from purely random data with no structure. Both methods
of assessment suggested five factors be extracted. These factors were then subjected to oblique
(oblimin) rotation. In interpreting the factors, loadings of above .4 were considered as important
to the factor, but loadings of .3 were not ignored (see Table 1).
Four of the five rotated factors were interpretable, with the fifth factor being difficult to inter-
pret as only three items loaded on this factor.
Of the remaining four, the first factor to emerge was an ‘establishing contact’ factor, comprising
items such as ‘I must have sent over a hundred letters/e-mails to my favourite celebrity’ and ‘I
have tried to phone my favourite celebrity’.
The second factor is a ‘collecting’ factor be it material related to the celebrity, or experiences: ‘I
have a huge amount of material relating to my favourite celebrity’ and ‘I have a shrine dedicated
to my favourite celebrity’.
The third factor focuses on ‘sexual’ thoughts and feelings towards the favourite celebrity: ‘If I
met my favourite celebrity we would flirt with each other’ and ‘If it were not for other people, my
favourite celebrity and I could have a closer relationship’.
The final interpretable factor is a ‘stalking’ factor. This factor contains items such as ‘No
amount of security could keep me away from my favourite celebrity if I decided to visit him/
her’ and ‘I would stalk my favourite celebrity if I had the means to do so’.
Loadings of .4 were deemed important and taken forward to compute four subscales. The
establishing contact subscale comprised 15 items, the collecting subscale comprised 11 items,
the sexual subscale comprised 7 items and the stalking subscale comprised 7 items. Acceptable
internal reliability statistics were found for all the subscales (Establishing Contact, a= .81; Col-
lecting, a= .84; Sexuality, a= .75; Stalking, a= .73).
Table 2 shows the means for the four subscales of the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory.
To assess the prevalence of these behaviours we used an arbitrary split of scores above the
L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535 529

Table 1
Principal components analysis with oblimin rotation of the 50 items of the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory
1234 5
I must have sent over a hundred letters/e-mails to my favourite celebrity .698
I have tried to phone my favourite celebrity .675
I have tried to get closer to my favourite celebrity’s family .659
I have followed my favourite celebrity in a car or on foot .632
I have gone to see my favourite celebrity’s home .610 .317
I have talked to a doctor or psychologist about my feelings
for my favourite celebrity
.602
I have phoned someone close to my favourite celebrity
(such as their publicist/agent/best friend) on a number of occasions
.589
I would write an e-mail/letter to my favourite celebrity
at least once a day
.580
I have a future appointment to meet up with my favourite celebrity .577
I know my favourite celebrity’s home address .551
My favourite celebrity loves me .542
I have a psychic connection with my favourite celebrity .541
I love my favourite celebrity more than I could ever love another person .499
I am secretly married to my favourite celebrity .484 .323
I often find myself crying about my favourite celebrity because
my feelings for him/her are so intense
.415 .391
I have a huge amount of material relating to my favourite celebrity .855
I have hundreds of hours of video tape of my favourite celebrity
making appearances in the media
.803
I have written letters or e-mails to my favourite celebrity .706
Sometimes I feel that no-one understands my feelings
for my favourite celebrity
.655
I would travel thousands of miles to see my favourite celebrity .658
I have a shrine dedicated to my favourite celebrity .633
I have sent presents to my favourite celebrity .314 .519
I feel constantly that I desire my favourite celebrity with all my body .495 .349 .368
I know intimate details about my favourite celebrity .478
I would go on the television/radio talking about my favourite celebrity .468
It has been suggested that I seek help regarding my feelings
towards my favourite celebrity
.421
I have approached my favourite celebrity and they have not known
who I was
.315
I would give up my work, family and friends if my favourite
celebrity asked me to
.307
If I met my favourite celebrity we would flirt with each other .807
I do not like my celebrity’s romantic partner .657
My favourite celebrity is a notorious flirt .596
My favourite celebrity and I are destined to be together .561
I have fantasies of an intimate nature about my favourite celebrity .365 .518 .382
If it were not for other people, my favourite celebrity and I could
have a closer relationship
.453
If my favourite celebrity ignored me, then I would feel angry .416
My favourite celebrity would show an interest in projects
I am currently doing
.393 .505
530 L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535

theoretical halfway point on the scale that has been used in other papers (e.g. Maltby et al., 2002)
to categorise people into types. The results were as follows: 10.4% of the sample fell into the sex-
uality category 10.2% of the sample fell into the collecting behaviour category, 2.4% fell into the
stalking category, and 2.2% of the sample fell into the establishing contact category.
3. Study 2
3.1. Method
3.1.1. Participants
The participant recruitment strategy was similar to that employed for Study 1 but was confined
to the United Kingdom. Two hundred and fifteen participants (83 males, 132 females) took part in
the final study. Participants were aged from 18 to 50 years with a mean age of 28.69 years (SD
8.9). The most reported demographic statistics were single or dating (59.1%), white (82.4%),
and in full-time education (25.7%).
Table 1 (continued)
12345
I am related to a famous person .451
I yearn to be my favourite celebrity .414
Every celebrity needs a stalker .723
Sometimes ‘stalking’ is the only way to make a celebrity notice you .662
I would stalk my favourite celebrity if I had the means to do so .661
I wish my favourite celebrity was dead .530
Privately I would admit to stalking my favourite celebrity .333 .524
If I could I would ensure that my favourite celebrity and myself
would die together
.471
I would physically hurt someone else if my favourite celebrity
asked me to
.443
I would pay a private detective to find out more about my
favourite celebrity
.402
I would lie and cheat in order to meet my favourite celebrity .348 .394
No amount of security could keep me away from my favourite celebrity
if I decided to visit him/her
.304 .348
I would get a job close to where I knew my favourite celebrity worked
or hung out
.319 .331
I would move house to be closer to my favourite celebrity .316
Table 2
Mean scores on the four subscales of the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory (Study 1, N= 1162)
Mean Standard deviation
Establishing contact (15 items) 19.69 8.8
Collecting (11 items) 18.27 8.4
Sexuality (7 items) 13.90 5.5
Stalking (7 items) 10.52 4.7
L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535 531

3.1.2. Questionnaires
Participants were administered the following questionnaires:
1. The Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory, as described in Study 1 above.
2. The Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES; Bernstein & Putnam, 1986). This is a 28-item self-
report measure of the frequency of dissociative experiences. An example item is ‘Some people
have the experience of looking in a mirror and not recognising themselves [item 11]’. Partic-
ipants are asked to circle a number between 0 and 100 (in intervals of 10) to show what per-
centage of the time this happens to them.
3. Tellegen Absorption Scale (Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974). This is a 34-item self-report measure
of absorption through responsiveness to engaging stimuli, synaesthesia, enhanced cognition,
oblivious/dissociative involvement, vivid reminiscence and enhanced awareness. An example
item is ‘It is sometimes possible for me to be completely immersed in nature or in art and to
feel as if my whole state of consciousness has somehow been temporarily altered [item 16]’.
Participants are asked to respond ‘True’ or ‘False’ to each item.
3.2. Results
Confirmatory factor analysis was performed using the 40 items that formed the four-factor
interpretation (establishing contact, collecting, sexuality and stalking) identified in Study 1. To
estimate goodness of fit, a cut-off criterion of .95 was used for the maximum likelihood (ML)
based statistics, the Tucker Lewis Index (TLI [NNFI]), the incremental fit index (IFI [BL89]),
and the comparative fit index (CFI); a cut-off of .08 for the standardized root mean square resid-
ual (SRMR); and a cut-off of .06 for the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Hu
& Bentler, 1999). The goodness of fit statistics suggested that the model produced by the first
study represented a reasonably good fit of the data (v
2
/df = 6.45; SRMR = .05; RMSEA = .06;
GFI = .91; AGFI = .92; NFI = .91; TLI = .90; CFI = .91; IFI = .91).
Table 3 shows the mean scores for the three scales. Table 4 details the correlations between the
four subscales of the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory, the Dissociative Experiences Scale,
and the Tellegen Absorption Scale. All four subscales of the PFPI share significant positive cor-
relations with Dissociative Experiences and Absorption. Also, Dissociative Experiences and
Absorption share a significant positive correlation, albeit low, which is consistent with the overlap
between descriptions of the two constructs.
Table 3
Mean scores on the four subscales of the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory, the Dissociative Experiences Scale and
the Tellegen Absorption Scale (Study 2, N= 215)
Mean Standard deviation
Establishing contact (15 items) 20.27 10.1
Collecting (11 items) 19.01 8.4
Sexuality (7 items) 14.25 5.7
Stalking (7 items) 10.47 5.0
Tellegen Absorption Scale 12.10 4.3
Dissociative Experiences Scale 18.71 11.9
532 L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535

Because of the significant correlations between the four subscales of the PFPI, two nonstandar-
dised multiple regressions were performed with Absorption and Dissociative Experiences used
as dependent variables, and the four subscales of the PFPI entered as predictor variables.
For Absorption the regression statistic was significantly different from zero (F(4,210) = 5.38,
p< .01), and for Dissociative Experiences the regression statistic was significantly different from
zero (F(4,210) = 13.79, p< .01). Table 5 contains the full results for both these nonstandardised
multiple regression analyses. Included in this table are the nonstandardised regression coefficients
(B), the standardised regression coefficients (b), the semipartial correlations (sr
2
), r,r
2
and
adjusted r
2
. These findings suggest that establishing contact with the celebrity accounts for unique
variance in dissociative experiences, while sexuality and then stalking account for unique variance
in absorption scores.
Table 4
Pearson product moment correlation coefficients between the four subscales of the Public Figure Preoccupation
Inventory, the Dissociative Experiences Scale and the Tellegen Absorption Scale (Study 2, N= 215)
Collecting Sexuality Establishing contact Stalking Absorption Dissociative
experiences
Collecting 1
Sexuality .651(
**
)1
Establishing contact .750(
**
) .604(
**
)1
Stalking .654(
**
) .590(
**
) .840(
**
)1
Absorption .215(
**
) .247(
**
) .283(
**
) .276(
**
)1
Dissociative Experiences .362(
**
) .275(
**
) .448(
**
) .417(
**
) .213(
**
)1
**
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 5
Two nonstandardised multiple regressions with Absorption and Dissociative Experiences used as dependent variables,
and the four subscales of the Public Figure Preoccupation Inventory used as predictor variables
Scales BbtSig.
Dissociative Experiences
Collecting .196 .184 1.376 .170
Sexuality .194 .134 1.175 .241
Establishing contact .309 .316 1.988 .048
Stalking .484 .254 1.754 .081
r
2
=.09
Adj r
2
=.08
r=.31
Absorption
Collecting .096 .155 1.412 .159
Sexuality .416 .496 5.281 .000
Establishing contact .023 .041 .314 .754
Stalking .268 .242 2.037 .043
r
2
=.21
Adj r
2
=.19
r=.46
L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535 533

4. Discussion
The present studies have for the first time administered the Public Figure Preoccupation Inven-
tory. Comparison of the factor structures produced by two large samples has proved promising,
demonstrating respectable goodness of fit. A model of preoccupation with public figures has been
produced, and when this model was tested via measures of dissociation and absorption, the results
were largely as expected.
Findings from multiple regression analyses demonstrated that the ‘establishing contact’ with
the celebrity factor accounted for unique variance in dissociative experiences. The ‘sexuality’
and ‘stalking’ factors, on the other hand, accounted for unique variance in absorption scores.
Examining absorption first, this result would suggest a focus on the celebrity as an individual. Pre-
vious work (e.g. Tellegen & Atkinson, 1974) has demonstrated that the thoughts of persons who
score highly on absorption measures are ordered and focused, and the stalking literature (e.g.
Boon & Sheridan, 2001) informs that in order to be labeled as a stalker, one must have exhibited
an excessive or pathological focus on the target. Indeed, although all the specific scale items com-
prising the ‘stalking’ factor are negative in tone, none would indicate clear evidence of dissociation
(e.g. ‘If I could I would ensure that my favourite celebrity and myself would die together’, ‘I would
pay a private detective to find out more about my favourite celebrity’). What is not known at this
juncture is whether extreme absorption with a public figure increases dissociation in other aspects
of the preoccupied individual’s world. It may be that as absorption with a celebrity increases,
other facets of life decrease in their importance. The current findings however, have indicated that
overall, absorption, public figure preoccupation and dissociation are correlated.
Given that the ‘establishing contact’ factor accounted for unique variance in dissociation
scores, we would expect this factor to contain items that were indicative of fantasy and inaccurate
beliefs. Indeed, constituent items include ‘I have a psychic connection with my favourite celebrity’,
‘My favourite celebrity loves me’, and ‘I often find myself crying about my favourite celebrity be-
cause my feelings for him/her are so intense’. It is important to remember that none of the 50
PFPI items were intended to represent positive, adaptive behaviours, and it would be expected
that the majority of individuals would produce a very low overall score. Of those persons that
do establish contact with a favoured public figure, it may be that their motivations are at least
partly fuelled by psychiatric illness. Indeed, this would fit with previous evidence that the majority
of those who inappropriately approach public figures suffer diagnosable psychiatric disorder
(Dietz et al., 1991a, 1991b;Hoffmann & Sheridan, 2005).
Whether the less dissociated are more dangerous than those who will readily admit their will-
ingness to stalk a public figure is not known. The obvious next step in the development of the
PFPI would be to administer it to a sample of individuals charged with stalking and harassing
public figures. This suggestion is difficult and imperfect but would be beneficial in achieving the
following goals: (i) learning more about the levels of risk posed by preoccupied individuals, (ii)
ensuring threat management resources are channeled in the right direction and (iii) providing a
validity check for the scale. Ultimately, the 50 items could be refined in order to produce a risk
assessment checklist tool for those employed in threat assessment environments.
Until now, the sizeable literature on stalking and harassment and the growing literature on
celebrity worship have remained separate. The current paper has attempted to bridge the gap
between these two important topics, producing a model of preoccupation with public figures.
534 L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535

Clinical aspects associated with the factors that comprise this model have revealed relationships
between dissociation and establishing contact with a public figure, and absorption and what we
have now come to know as ‘stalking’. It is hoped that lateral employment of this scale will lead
to practical developments in understanding those preoccupied with public figures.
References
Bernstein, E. M., & Putnam, F. W. (1986). Development, reliability, and validity of a dissociation scale. Journal of
Nervous and Mental Disease, 174, 727–735.
Boon, J. C. W., & Sheridan, L. (2001). Stalker typologies: a law enforcement perspective. Journal of Threat Assessment,
1, 75–97.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.
Dietz, P. E., Matthews, D. B., Martell, D. A., et al. (1991a). Threatening and otherwise inappropriate letters to
members of the United States Congress. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36, 1445–1468.
Dietz, P. E., Matthews, D. B., Van Duyne, C., et al. (1991b). Threatening and otherwise inappropriate letters to
Hollywood celebrities. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36, 185–209.
Ferris, K. O. (2001). Through a glass, darkly: the dynamics of fan-celebrity encounters. Symbolic Interaction, 24, 25–47.
Hoffmann, J., & Sheridan, L. (2005). The stalking of public figures: management and intervention. Journal of Forensic
Sciences, 14, 51–62.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.
Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: observations on intimacy at a
distance’. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria
versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6, 1–55.
Leets, L., de Becker, G., & Giles, H. (1995). Fans: Exploring expressed motivations for contacting celebrities. Journal of
Language and Social Psychology, 14, 102–123.
Malsch, M., Visscher, M., & Blaauw, E. (2002). Stalking van bekende personen [Stalking of celebrities]. Den Haag:
Boom.
Maltby, J., Day, L., McCutcheon, L. E., Houran, J., & Ashe, D. (2006). Extreme celebrity worship, fantasy proneness
and dissociation: developing the measurement and understanding of celebrity worship within a clinical personality
context. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(2), 273–283.
Maltby, J., Houran, J., Lange, R., Ashe, D., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2002). Thou shalt worship no other Gods—unless
they are celebrities. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1157–1172.
McCutcheon, L. E., Lange, R., & Houran, J. (2002). Conceptualization and measurement of celebrity worship. British
Journal of Psychology, 93, 67–87.
Mullen, P. E., Pathe
´, M., & Purcell, R. (2000). Stalkers and their victims. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sheridan, L., Blaauw, E., & Davies, G. M. (2003). Stalking: knowns and unknowns. Trauma, Violence and Abuse: A
Review Journal, 4, 148–162.
Sheridan, L., & Davies, G. M. (2001). Stalking: the elusive crime. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 6, 133–147.
Tellegen, A., & Atkinson, G. (1974). Openness to absorbing and self-altering experiences (‘absorption’), a trait related
to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 268–277.
L. Sheridan et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 41 (2006) 525–535 535