Stereotypes of the Public Concerning Psychotropic Drugs and Compliance with Medication

Goerg, D.; Zbinden, E.; Fischer, W.; Guimón, José

doi:10.1016/s0924-9338(97)80278-7

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, people have been found to maintain greater social distance from individuals labelled with "schizophrenia" than with "depression" (e.g., Angermeyer & Matschinger, 2003;Angermeyer et al, 2004;Crisp et al, 2000;Griffiths et al, 2006;Lauber et al, 2004;Marie & Miles, 2008), which is likely the result of people labelled with "schizophrenia" being perceived as more untrustworthy, unpredictable, irrational, and violent compared to individuals labelled with "depression" (e.g., Angermeyer et al, 2004;Angermeyer & Dietrich, 2006;Berryessa et al, 2015;Corrigan et al, 2000;Meltzer & Rowlands, 2000;Schomerus et al, 2010). Research also suggests that individuals with depression are perceived as having a better prognosis overall compared to those with schizophrenia (Goerg et al, 2004;Hugo et al, 2003;Schomerus et al, 2006). This is thought to arise from people assuming that depression has less of a biological basis than schizophrenia (Angermeyer & Matschinger, 2003;Schomerus et al, 2006).…”

Section: Beliefs About Mental Illnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of witness mental illness and use of special measures in court on individual mock juror decision-making

Gous

Azoui

Kramer

et al. 2022

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is unclear whether witness mental illness and special measures used with witnesses in court impacts juror decision-making. Participants (N=204) from the general public and student population completed a measure assessing attitudes towards mental illness before reading a mock trial vignette where witness mental illness (depression, schizophrenia, no mental illness) and the special measure used in court (screen, intermediary, no special measure) were manipulated. Participants were then instructed to formulate judgements about the witness testimony provided (reliability, competency, credibility) and their likelihood of finding the defendant guilty. The findings showed that witnesses with depression were perceived as significantly more competent than witnesses with schizophrenia, or with no mental illness. Witnesses with depression were also perceived as significantly more competent than witnesses with schizophrenia when a screen was used in court. There was however no difference in competency ratings for witnesses with depression versus those with schizophrenia when no special measure was used, or when an intermediary was used, although witnesses with depression were still viewed more favourably overall. These findings suggest that some awareness of these biases is needed in court. Improving clarity about why special measures are used in court might also go some way towards addressing this issue.

show abstract