Psycho-education and familiarity with severe mental illness arbitrate change in public stigma of severe mental illness. A survey study exploring the attributions of dangerousness and avoidance from people with severe mental illness was carried out. The study employed opportunity sampling and sixty students (m=30; f=30) half of which were students of Psychology and the other half were students of MBA. The students’ familiarity with severe mental illness, the perception of dangerousness and the desire to avoid from persons with severe mental illness were gathered via a self-administered electronic survey. More females than males showed a heightened level of fear and avoidance from persons with severe mental illness. However, students with a psychology background showed more desire for social inclusion and lower perception of dangerousness than the MBA. Similarly, students with the high level of familiarity showed less fear and more tolerance towards persons with severe mental illness than students with low level of familiarity, which supported the earlier findings.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Method
Design
Participants
Materials
Variables
Procedure
Pilot Study
Data Screening
Results: Hypothesis 1, 2 & 3
Results: Hypothesis 4
Attributions of dangerousness
Attribution of avoidance
Results: Hypothesis 5
Discussion
Research Objectives and Focus Areas
The primary objective of this study is to investigate the attributions of dangerousness, avoidance, and familiarity regarding severe mental illness (SMI) among professional students in management (MBA) and psychology. By exploring these factors within groups of future leaders and decision-makers, the research seeks to identify how educational backgrounds and personal familiarity influence stigmatizing attitudes, ultimately aiming to understand how to mitigate social distance and discriminatory behaviors towards individuals living with SMI.
- Comparison of stigma levels between male and female students.
- Assessment of differences in attitudes based on academic orientation (Psychology vs. MBA).
- Evaluation of the relationship between gender, academic discipline, and social distance.
- Analysis of familiarity as a predictive factor for dangerousness and avoidance perceptions.
Excerpt from the Book
Introduction
Research showed that the majority of the people have negative stereotypical views with regards to severe mental illness (Byrne, 2001; Angermeyer, Holzinger & Carta, 2011). Studies indicate individuals with SMI are aware of the social stigma attached with the psychiatric illness. Hence, to avoid labeled and ridiculed by the society, they often keep their illness a secret (Angermeyer & Matschinger, 2003). Goffman (1963. as cited in Corrigan,Markowitz &Watson , 2004) defined stigma is an endorsement of discredit or disgrace which allows social isolation. Corrigan (2000) posited that the stigma of severe mental illness (SMI) is a socio–cognitive process which interprets and discredits salient invalid cues through stereotypic thoughts. Unfortunately, stigma is not an attribute that remains internalized within a person, but it translates into discriminatory behaviour. Individuals with SMI not only suffer silently but also endure prejudice, isolation and social injustice.
Numerous studies suggest that knowingly or unknowingly the general community including employers and corporate leaders practice or have discriminatory policies that stigmatized people with SMI (Corrigan, Watson, Warpinski & Gracia, 2004). However, because the stigma is a social interaction process, contact familiarity (Angermeyer, Matschinger &Corrigan,2004 ; Corrigan, 2005) and knowledge about SMI (Corrigan et al., 2004) greatly affect attitude change and social distance (Corrigan et al., 2001). Tacking public stigma of SMI is important because researchers can identify social inequalities and introduce humanistic practices that address the rights of individuals with SMI. Social research on public stigma of SMI has serious implications on public health educators, healthcare system and politically motivated laws.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: This chapter reviews the existing literature on public stigma regarding severe mental illness, highlighting the impact of stereotypes on social exclusion and the potential role of familiarity and education in shaping attitudes.
Method: This section details the cross-sectional, survey-based study design, the participant demographics, the materials (AQ-27 and LOF scales), and the procedures used to collect data from psychology and MBA students.
Results: Hypothesis 1, 2 & 3: This chapter presents the statistical analysis comparing stigma and avoidance scores across gender and academic disciplines, showing significant differences between groups.
Results: Hypothesis 4: This section uses simple linear regression to demonstrate that level of familiarity is a significant negative predictor of attributions of dangerousness and avoidance towards individuals with SMI.
Results: Hypothesis 5: This chapter analyzes the differences in stigma scores among students categorized by low, medium, and high levels of familiarity, identifying significant variations between these groups.
Discussion: This final chapter interprets the findings in the context of existing literature, addresses study limitations, and suggests implications for future anti-stigma educational interventions and social policy.
Keywords
Severe Mental Illness, Stigma, Dangerousness, Avoidance, Familiarity, Psychology Students, MBA Students, Social Distance, Public Health, Attribution Model, Psycho-education, Discrimination, Mental Health Literacy, Social Inclusion, Quantitative Analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research study?
The study examines how perception of dangerousness, avoidance behavior, and personal familiarity with severe mental illness differ among students from Psychology and MBA backgrounds.
What are the primary themes addressed?
The study focuses on the psychological processes behind stigmatization, the impact of education and familiarity on attitude change, and the social integration of individuals with severe mental illness.
What is the central research question?
The research explores whether academic orientation (Psychology vs. MBA) and varying levels of personal familiarity correlate with differences in the stigma of dangerousness and social distance toward individuals with SMI.
Which scientific methodology was applied?
The research utilized a quantitative cross-sectional design employing electronic surveys, applying the Attribution Model of Public Discrimination (AQ-27) and the Level of Familiarity (LOF) scale.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main sections cover the literature review on stigma, the methodology for survey deployment, statistical analysis of results regarding hypotheses, and a critical discussion of the implications of the findings.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include severe mental illness, social stigma, dangerousness, avoidance, familiarity, and psycho-education.
How does gender influence the results in this study?
The study found that gender played a significant role in stigmatizing attitudes, with results indicating that perceptions of dangerousness and avoidance were statistically greater in female students compared to male students.
What relationship exists between familiarity and stigma?
The findings indicate a significant negative correlation: higher levels of personal familiarity are associated with reduced perceptions of dangerousness and a lower desire to avoid individuals with severe mental illness.
How do Psychology students differ from MBA students regarding these attitudes?
The analysis revealed that students with a background in Psychology demonstrated a significantly higher desire for social inclusion and a lower perception of dangerousness toward people with SMI compared to MBA students.
- Citation du texte
- Raja Sree R Subramaniam (Auteur), 2014, The Stigma of Severe Mental Illness to Male and Female Students of Psychology and MBA, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/313300
