Intervention for reducing stigma: Assessing the influence of gender and knowledge

Abstract

AIM:To evaluate the effectiveness in reducing social stigma of an intervention and to assess the influence of gender and knowledge. METHODS:The program consisted in providing information and contact with users of mental health in order to reduce social stigma in the school environment. A total of 62 secondary school students (age 14-16 years) were evaluated with the Opinions on Mental Illness (OMI) questionnaire before and after the intervention. The subscales of the OMI were: authoritarianism, interpersonal etiology, benevolence, restrictiveness and negativism. The analysis was performed over the total sample, separating by gender and knowledge of someone with a mental disorder. t -test for repeated measures was used in the statistical analysis. RESULTS:All the OMI subscales showed a significant change after the intervention (P < 0.001), except for benevolence. Women presented significant changes in the subscales of authoritarianism and restrictiveness, while men presented changes in negativism and interpersonal etiology rather than restrictiveness (P < 0.001-0.003). Students that knew someone with a mental disorder presented significant changes in authoritarianism, interpersonal etiology, and negativism (P < 0.001-0.003) and students that do not know anyone with a mental disorder improved in restrictiveness and authoritarianism (P < 0.001-0.001). In all the subscales of the instrument the students improved their perception of mental disorders, reducing their levels of stigma. CONCLUSION:The intervention designed to reduce social stigma was effective, especially in the area of authoritarianism. The whole sample showed improved attitudes towards mental illness, although the areas were different depending on gender and knowledge.

Mental Health Literacy in Young Adults: Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of the Mental Health Literacy Questionnaire

“…Differences were found regarding gender and proximity with someone with a mental health problem. In general, females and participants who reported knowing someone with a mental health problem showed higher levels of mental health literacy, in line with previous research [8,11,15,16,17,18,19]. …”

Behavioral health morbidity for those studying or working internationally

“…Specific percentages of different types of behavioral health issues experienced by students reveal that students either intentionally harmed another (5 percent), seriously considered harming another (7 percent), had a prior suicide attempt (8 percent), prior psychiatric hospitalization (9 percent), non-suicidal self-injury (21 percent), seriously considered suicide (25 percent), prior psychotropic medication usage (34 percent) and/or received prior counseling (51 percent; Gillingham et al, 2010). While there is currently insufficient research evidence available to draw firm conclusions on the causes and consequences of student behavioral health issues, the real or perceived increase in the incidence of mental illness, observed in this student population, is likely a reflection of multiple factors, such as, among others: de-stigmatization of mental health, which encourages more students to seek help/ treatment (Martinez-Zambrano et al, 2013); increase in dysfunctionality of the family unit (Whitfield, 2006); manifestation of most major psychological disorders (i.e. bipolar disease, schizophrenia) initially manifest on or about the age of young adulthood (McGorry et al, 2011); efficacy of psychotropic drugswith limited side effectsenabling young men and women with major psychological disabilities to graduate from high school and attend college/university (Barber, 2008); glamorization of risk-taking lifestyles and substance abuse by celebrities (Shaw et al, 2010).…”

From Authoritarianism to Advocacy: Lifestyle-Driven, Socially-Transmitted Conditions Require a Transformation in Medical Training and Practice

“…Authoritarianism (expecting or requiring people to obey; favoring a concentration of power; limitation of personal freedoms) generally is not the sort of attribute that is be celebrated in modern society. Research studies dating back to the 1950s have linked authoritarianism with broad aspects of prejudice, rigid adherence to mainstream convention and the stigmatization of out-groups [91][92][93]. The authoritarian uses broad brush strokes in a cognitive style devoid of depth and nuance; out-groups are branded in simplistic, all-or-none style [94].…”