Generalizability and specificity of the stigma associated with the mental illness label: A reconsideration twenty-five years later

Abstract

The current status of the generalizability (i.e., application across situations) and specificity (i.e., differentiation from other deviant behavior stigmas) of the mental illness stigma was re‐examined 25 years after delineation by Lamy (1966). College undergraduate students completed 30 forced‐choice items measuring deep‐level attitudes toward ex‐mental patients vis‐à‐vis ex‐convicts or ex‐drug addicts. Etiological factors and various areas of functioning (i.e., psychological and social functioning, dating and romantic relationships, family, children, work, and rehabilitation and recidivism) were considered. An attitudinal hierarchy was found for the three deviant social roles, with the ex‐drug addict role eliciting the least negative attitudes and the ex‐convict role eliciting the most negative attitudes. The current results indicate that the stigma associated with the ex‐mental patient role continues to be specific to that deviant social role; however, as compared to the results of Lamy, attitudes toward this deviant social role have evolved in a positive direction. The generalizability of the stigma reported by Lamy has diminished in relation to negative attitudes but remains somewhat stable for positive attitudes. Although college students were the participants in Lamy's study, their use in this study may restrict the generalizability of these deep‐level attitude findings.

‘Judging a book by its cover’: An experimental study of the negative impact of a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder on clinicians’ judgements of uncomplicated panic disorder

“…In this study, we were concerned with the potentially stigmatizing impact of diagnosis. The stigma of mental illness has long been recognized as a significant social issue (Goodyear & Parish, ) and it has been suggested that diagnostic labels can contribute to this stigmatization process (Skinner, Berry, Griffith, & Byers, ). Further, diagnostic labels can have a devastating effect on an individual's sense of self through a process of internalized stigma where the individual applies negative public perceptions of mental illness to themselves.…”

Perceived Stigma and Barriers to Care for Psychological Treatment: Implications for Reactions to Stressors in Different Contexts

“…Corrigan and Penn (1999) have defined stigma as a negative and erroneous attitude about a person, akin to a prejudice or negative stereotype. Public stigma reflects the negative attitudes that the general public has toward people with mental illness, inviting discrimination, fear, and pessimism (Link, 1987;Link, Cullen, Frank, & Wozniak, 1987;Purvis, Brandt, Rouse, Vera, & Range, 1988;Skinner, Berry, Griffith, & Byers, 1995). Self stigma is the internalization of how the general public portrays people with mental illness, and the belief in that portrayal (Corrigan & Watson, 2002;Link, Cullen, Struening, Shrout, & Dohrenwend, 1989;).…”

The effects of symptoms, diagnostic labels, and education in psychiatry on the stigmatization towards schizophrenia: a questionnaire survey among a lay population in Japan

“…11 Case presentations containing only the description ex-mental patient, with no symptomatic or behavioral descriptions, results in stigmatization (e.g., Skinner et al). 12 The term schizophrenia is a composite word derived from the Greek words split and mind. This terminology is stigmatizing but the Japanese label may be even more so: seishinbunretsu-byou, a composite of Chinese characters meaning split spirit (or soul) disease.…”