The 'side effects' of medicalization: a meta-analytic review of how biogenetic explanations affect stigma.
TL;DR: It is found that biogenetic explanations reduce blame but induce pessimism and set the stage for self-fulfilling prophecies that could hamper recovery from psychological problems.
About: This article is published in Clinical Psychology Review.The article was published on 2013-08-01. It has received 336 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Blame.
Citations
More filters
Journal Article•
738 citations
TL;DR: Critiques of the GMH movement are addressed and how the movement can respond through appropriate modes of community-based practice and ongoing research are suggested, while continuing to work for greater equity and social justice in access to effective, socially relevant, culturally safe and appropriate mental health care on a global scale.
Abstract: Current efforts in global mental health (GMH) aim to address the inequities in mental health between low-income and high-income countries, as well as vulnerable populations within wealthy nations (e.g., indigenous peoples, refugees, urban poor). The main strategies promoted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and other allies have been focused on developing, implementing, and evaluating evidence-based practices that can be scaled up through task-shifting and other methods to improve access to services or interventions and reduce the global treatment gap for mental disorders. Recent debates on global mental health have raised questions about the goals and consequences of current approaches. Some of these critiques emphasize the difficulties and potential dangers of applying Western categories, concepts, and interventions given the ways that culture shapes illness experience. The concern is that in the urgency to address disparities in global health, interventions that are not locally relevant and culturally consonant will be exported with negative effects including inappropriate diagnoses and interventions, increased stigma, and poor health outcomes. More fundamentally, exclusive attention to mental disorders identified by psychiatric nosologies may shift attention from social structural determinants of health that are among the root causes of global health disparities. This paper addresses these critiques and suggests how the GMH movement can respond through appropriate modes of community-based practice and ongoing research, while continuing to work for greater equity and social justice in access to effective, socially relevant, culturally safe and appropriate mental health care on a global scale.
215 citations
TL;DR: This paper reviewed evidence of these mixed blessings from three perspectives: how people with mental disorders are viewed by the public, by themselves, and by clinicians, and interpreted these findings in light of social psychology research on essentialist and mechanistic thinking.
Abstract: Biogenetic explanations of mental disorder are increasingly prominent. However, they have decidedly mixed implications for how affected persons are perceived. We review evidence of these mixed blessings from three perspectives: how people with mental disorders are viewed by the public, by themselves, and by clinicians. Although biogenetic explanations may soften public stigma by diminishing blame, they increase it by inducing pessimism, avoidance, and the belief that affected people are dangerous and unpredictable. These explanations may also induce pessimism and helplessness among affected people and reduce the empathy their treating clinicians feel for them. We interpret these findings in light of social psychology research on essentialist and mechanistic thinking.
161 citations
03 Aug 2016
TL;DR: The Evidence for Stigma Change (ESC) report as discussed by the authors explores stigma and discrimination faced by individuals with mental or substance use disorders and recommends effective strategies for reducing stigma and encouraging people to seek treatment and other supportive services.
Abstract: Estimates indicate that as many as 1 in 4 Americans will experience a mental health problem or will misuse alcohol or drugs in their lifetimes. These disorders are among the most highly stigmatized health conditions in the United States, and they remain barriers to full participation in society in areas as basic as education, housing, and employment. Improving the lives of people with mental health and substance abuse disorders has been a priority in the United States for more than 50 years. The Community Mental Health Act of 1963 is considered a major turning point in America's efforts to improve behavioral healthcare. It ushered in an era of optimism and hope and laid the groundwork for the consumer movement and new models of recovery. The consumer movement gave voice to people with mental and substance use disorders and brought their perspectives and experience into national discussions about mental health.However over the same 50-year period, positive change in American public attitudes and beliefs about mental and substance use disorders has lagged behind these advances. Stigma is a complex social phenomenon based on a relationship between an attribute and a stereotype that assigns undesirable labels, qualities, and behaviors to a person with that attribute. Labeled individuals are then socially devalued, which leads to inequality and discrimination. This report contributes to national efforts to understand and change attitudes, beliefs and behaviors that can lead to stigma and discrimination. Changing stigma in a lasting way will require coordinated efforts, which are based on the best possible evidence, supported at the national level with multiyear funding, and planned and implemented by an effective coalition of representative stakeholders. Ending Discrimination Against People with Mental and Substance Use Disorders: The Evidence for Stigma Change explores stigma and discrimination faced by individuals with mental or substance use disorders and recommends effective strategies for reducing stigma and encouraging people to seek treatment and other supportive services. It offers a set of conclusions and recommendations about successful stigma change strategies and the research needed to inform and evaluate these efforts in the United States.
161 citations
TL;DR: It is found that contact interventions and educational interventions have small-to-medium immediate effects upon stigma, but further research is required to investigate how to sustain benefits in the longer-term, and to understand the active ingredients of interventions to maximise their effectiveness.
161 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: A new quantity is developed, I 2, which the authors believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis, which is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta- analysis.
Abstract: Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I 2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice?
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can provide convincing and reliable evidence relevant to many aspects of medicine and health care.1 Their value is especially clear when the results of the studies they include show clinically important effects of similar magnitude. However, the conclusions are less clear when the included studies have differing results. In an attempt to establish whether studies are consistent, reports of meta-analyses commonly present a statistical test of heterogeneity. The test seeks to determine whether there are genuine differences underlying the results of the studies (heterogeneity), or whether the variation in findings is compatible with chance alone (homogeneity). However, the test is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta-analysis. We have developed a new quantity, I 2, which we believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis.
Assessment of the consistency of effects across studies is an essential part of meta-analysis. Unless we know how consistent the results of studies are, we cannot determine the generalisability of the findings of the meta-analysis. Indeed, several hierarchical systems for grading evidence state that the results of studies must be consistent or homogeneous to obtain the highest grading.2–4
Tests for heterogeneity are commonly used to decide on methods for combining studies and for concluding consistency or inconsistency of findings.5 6 But what does the test achieve in practice, and how should the resulting P values be interpreted?
A test for heterogeneity examines the null hypothesis that all studies are evaluating the same effect. The usual test statistic …
45,105 citations
"The 'side effects' of medicalizatio..." refers background in this paper
...I2 measures the percentage of variation across studies that is due to heterogeneity rather than chance (Higgins et al., 2003)....
[...]
...I(2) measures the percentage of variation across studies that is due to heterogeneity rather than chance (Higgins et al., 2003)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the relationship between information control and personal identity, including the Discredited and the Discreditable Social Information Visibility Personal Identity Biography Biographical Others Passing Techniques of Information Control Covering.
Abstract: CONTENTS 1. Stigma and Social Identity Preliminary Conceptions The Own and the Wise Moral Career 2. Information Control and Personal Identity The Discredited and the Discreditable Social Information Visibility Personal Identity Biography Biographical Others Passing Techniques of Information Control Covering 3. Group Alignment and Ego Identity Ambivalence Professional Presentations In-Group Alignments Out-Group Alignments The Politics of Identity 4. The Self and Its Other Deviations and Norms The Normal Deviant Stigma and Reality 5. Deviations and Deviance
17,631 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1963
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the relationship between information control and personal identity, including the Discredited and the Discreditable Social Information Visibility Personal Identity Biography Biographical Others Passing Techniques of Information Control Covering.
Abstract: CONTENTS 1. Stigma and Social Identity Preliminary Conceptions The Own and the Wise Moral Career 2. Information Control and Personal Identity The Discredited and the Discreditable Social Information Visibility Personal Identity Biography Biographical Others Passing Techniques of Information Control Covering 3. Group Alignment and Ego Identity Ambivalence Professional Presentations In-Group Alignments Out-Group Alignments The Politics of Identity 4. The Self and Its Other Deviations and Norms The Normal Deviant Stigma and Reality 5. Deviations and Deviance
13,742 citations
Book•
27 Apr 200910,518 citations
01 Jan 2013
9,769 citations