Mental health disclosure amongst clinical psychologists in training: Perfectionism and pragmatism

Grice, Tom; Alcock, Kat; Scior, Katrina

doi:10.1002/cpp.2192

Cited by 17 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Put simply, applied psychologists have no immunity to mental health difficulties. Interestingly, American/Canadian graduate students in this sample reported nominally higher prevalence rates of MHDD (88.5%) compared to U.K. trainees (67%; Grice et al, 2018), and American/Canadian faculty exhibited nominally higher prevalence of MHDD (70.5%) compared to what prior research has found for U.K. registered clinical psychologists (63%; Tay et al, 2018). However, across these samples the overall distribution of diagnoses was similar, with depression and anxiety the most commonly reported, and bipolar and psychotic disorders among the least commonly reported diagnoses (Tay et al, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…In perhaps the largest survey of American psychologists' experiences with psychotherapy, conducted over twenty-five years ago (N = 476; Pope & Tabachnick, 1994), 84% of respondents reported having attended therapy as a client, most commonly for depression. In research from the UK, 63% of registered psychologists and 67% of psychology trainees reported lifetime mental illness (Grice et al, 2018;Tay et al, 2018). These studies provide preliminary evidence that mental health difficulties are prevalent within the profession of psychology, particularly among practitioners.…”

Section: Prior Research In Psychology Student and Faculty Mental Healthmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…This messaging may even decrease willingness among trainees to seek help from professional mentors following graduate school admission. For example, a survey of British trainee psychologists with lived experience found odds of disclosure were lowest for supervisors and instructors, compared to family, friends, and health care professionals (Grice et al, 2018). Furthermore, a recent study on the psychology faculty hiring process did not explicitly assess mental illness, but identified "exhibiting difficult personality traits" as the most strongly endorsed "kiss of death", highlighting how interpersonal perceptions continue to play a critical role even at the level of faculty selection procedures (Boysen et al, 2019).…”

Section: Prior Research In Psychology Student and Faculty Mental Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Only human: Mental health difficulties among clinical, counseling, and school psychology faculty and trainees

Se¹,

Devendorf²,

Lewis³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How common is mental illness among applied psychologists? This question is paradoxically neglected, perhaps because disclosure and discussion of lived mental health difficulties remains taboo within the field. This study documented high rates of current and lifetime mental health difficulties and diagnoses (MHDD) among faculty, graduate students, and others affiliated with accredited doctoral and internship programs in clinical, counseling, and school psychology. Over 80% of respondents (N = 1,395 of 1,692) reported lifetime mental health difficulties, and nearly half reported a formal mental health diagnosis. The most commonly reported lifetime MHDD were depression (over 55%), generalized anxiety disorder (over 50%), and suicidal thoughts or behaviors (over 40%), while bipolar (< 2%) and psychotic disorders (< 1%) were among the least reported. Most respondents with MHDD (90%) reported mild or no impairment in professional domains due to MHDD. Graduate students were more likely to endorse MHDD than faculty and were more likely to report professional impairment. Overall, lifetime rates of psychopathology within clinical, counseling, and school psychology faculty and trainees were similar to or greater than those observed in the general population. We discuss the implications of these results and suggest specific directions for future research on this heretofore neglected topic.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Prior Research In Psychology Student and Faculty Mental Healthmentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Prior Research In Psychology Student and Faculty Mental Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Only human: Mental health difficulties among clinical, counseling, and school psychology faculty and trainees

Se¹,

Devendorf²,

Lewis³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, they can also be agents for change and allies of people with mental illness. That may especially apply to situations in which they disclose their experience of own mental health problems to colleagues, patients or others [12]. There is no evidence that attitudes towards people with mental illness are less negative among German-speaking healthcare professionals compared to other countries [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Healthcare professionals can be a source of stigma and discrimination for people with mental illness, and anti-stigma programs are needed for this target group. However, there is no validated German language scale to assess attitudes of healthcare professionals towards people with mental illness. This study had the aim to validate the German language version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC), a self-report measure of stigmatizing attitudes. Methods Staff (n = 392) on general psychiatric inpatient wards (excluding child, forensic and geriatric psychiatry) at five psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland (n = 3) and Germany (n = 2) participated in the study. The internal consistency of the OMS-HC was examined as well as its factor structure using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. To assess the scale’s concurrent validity, we used the Social Distance Scale. Results Internal consistency for the OMS-HC total score was good (α = 0.74), acceptable for the subscales Attitudes (α = 0.62) and Social Distance (α = 0.69), and poor for the Disclosure subscale (α = 0.55). The original three-factor structure fit our data well. The OMS-HC total score and the Social Distance subscale score were significantly correlated with the Social Distance Scale, supporting concurrent validity. Conclusion The German version of the OMS-HC demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and can be recommended for future research and intervention evaluation.

show abstract

“…However, they can also be agents for change and allies of people with mental illness. That may especially apply to situations in which they disclose their experience of own mental health problems to colleagues, patients or others [12]. There is no difference that negative attitudes towards people with mental illness are lower among German-speaking healthcare professionals compared to other countries [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Evaluation of the German Version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

Zuaboni

Elmer

Rabenschlag

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Healthcare professionals can be a source of stigma and discrimination for people with mental illness, and anti-stigma programs are needed for this target group. However, there is no validated German language scale to assess attitudes of healthcare professionals towards people with mental illness. This study had the aim to validate the German language version of the Opening Minds Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC), a self-report measure of stigmatizing attitudes.Methods: Staff (n = 392) on general psychiatric inpatient wards (excluding child, forensic and geriatric psychiatry) at five psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland (n = 3) and Germany (n = 2) participated in the study. The internal consistency of the OMS-HC was examined as well as its factor structure using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. To assess the scale’s concurrent validity, we used the Social Distance Scale.Results: Internal consistency for the OMS-HC total score was good (α = 0.73), it was acceptable for the subscales Attitudes (α = 0.62) and Social Distance (α = 0.69), but poor for the Disclosure subscale (α = 0.55). The original three-factor structure fit our data well. The OMS-HC total score and the Social Distance subscale score were significantly correlated with the Social Distance Scale, supporting concurrent validity.Conclusion: The German version of the OMS-HC demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties and can be recommended for future research and intervention evaluation.

show abstract

Mental health disclosure amongst clinical psychologists in training: Perfectionism and pragmatism

Abstract: Results support an approach to communicating about mental health disclosure that incorporates responsibility, interdependency, and transparency. Suggestions for further research are discussed.

Cited by 17 publications

References 35 publications

Only human: Mental health difficulties among clinical, counseling, and school psychology faculty and trainees

Only human: Mental health difficulties among clinical, counseling, and school psychology faculty and trainees

Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

Psychometric Evaluation of the German Version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About