Figure - available from: PLOS One
This content is subject to copyright.
Frequencies of causal explanations present in Irish news media before and during the COVID-19 pandemic Before: 12th March 2018 -11th March 2020 (n = 339). During: 12th March 2020 – 12th Match 2022 (n = 289). Percentage values represent the frequency at which attributions occurred as a percentage of the total number of attributions in that time period.
Source publication
Public perceptions of the determinants of mental illness have important implications for attitudes and stigma, but minimal previous research has explored how causal attributions are spontaneously invoked in everyday public discourse. This study investigated how causal explanations for mental illness are disseminated in popular Irish news media, in...
Similar publications
Background
To examine if the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a differential effect longitudinally in relation to its psychological and functional impact on patients with bipolar disorder and Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder (EUPD).
Methods
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 individuals attending the Galway-Roscommon M...
Citations
... Some research indicates that the degree to which individuals believe lifestyle behaviors cause mental illness varies by disorder type, with recent research suggesting that some disorders, including depression, are more strongly associated with the belief that lifestyle behaviors impact mental illness compared to other types of mental disorders. 20,21 Beliefs about the role of lifestyle behaviors as causes of psychological distress may have important links to stigma. 22 This may be because lifestyle behaviors are seen as modifiable factors influenced by self-control, potentially causing individuals to be viewed as responsible for the development and maintenance of their mental illness. ...
Purpose: The current study aimed to understand how mental health stigma was affected by a person’s causal beliefs about mental illness, specifically, believing that mental distress is caused by poor lifestyle choices. This study also examined whether a participant’s own levels of healthy lifestyle behaviors moderated this relationship. These lifestyle factors included behaviors such as daily vegetable intake, physical activity, and sleep, along with substance use characteristics. Major Findings: The consistent finding across both samples was that believing that lifestyle behaviors predicted psychological distress was associated with greater pity towards those with mental illness. In the general adult sample, but not the undergraduate sample, lifestyle causal beliefs were also associated with greater anger and fear. There was some evidence that the degree to which a person followed their own healthy lifestyle behaviors (specifically their substance use) was associated with lower pity and greater anger, but only for those who reported using more substances themselves. Conclusions: The association of lifestyle causal beliefs with pity may be due to the known challenge of maintaining healthy lifestyles. These associations may be important to understand in the application of lifestyle medicine approaches to mental health and may provide targets for stigma reduction interventions.
... The significance of examining the links between social attributions and stigmatising attitudes is underscored by the prominence of causal explanations in the public domain. Attributions for mental illness often appear spontaneously in public discourse, such as in general discussions on the topic of mental health (Furnham & Swami, 2018), or through traditional media channels (Huggard & O'Connor, 2023). This is theorised to occur due to the importance of causal explanations in bringing meaning to difficult experiences (Manusov & Spitzberg, 2008). ...
... The current study incorporated a cross-sectional design, serving as a foundational exploration of the associations between specific social attributions and desire for social has indicated that biological attributions tend to be higher for schizophrenia compared to other mental illnesses, laypeople still tended to rate social factors as the most important explanations for schizophrenia overall (Furnham & Swami, 2018). This current finding may be reflective of growing efforts to increase awareness of biomedical factors in schizophrenia aetiology (Lebowitz & Appelbaum, 2019), and is consistent with a recent media analysis which found that health/lifestyle and biological factors were the most common explanations for psychotic disorders presented in traditional media channels (Huggard & O'Connor, 2023). For the other three mental illnesses included in the study, social factors were prioritised. ...
Previous research has indicated that biological attributions for mental illness are linked to stigma attitudes, but the implications of social attributions have received less empirical attention. This study aimed to explore the extent to which four distinct types of social attributions, along with biological attributions, relate to stigma, and how attribution tendencies vary by sociodemographic characteristics. Participants (N = 500) over the age of 18 from the UK and Ireland were recruited to an online repeated-measures survey, where they rated how important they believed different causal factors were in the aetiology of depression, schizophrenia, PTSD, and anorexia nervosa. Participants also completed demographic and attitudinal measures, including their desire for social distance from people with each mental illness. The importance people placed on the attributions varied by gender, prior knowledge of mental illness, and the type of mental illness. Violence/abuse was rated as the most important cause for depression, PTSD, and anorexia nervosa, while heredity/biological factors were rated as most important for schizophrenia. Overall, higher attributions to sociopolitical turmoil were associated with lower stigma. Attributions to heredity/biological factors were associated with greater stigma. There was no association between stigma and attributions to life circumstances, violence/abuse or relational challenges. Results indicate that explanations that emphasise experiences of sociopolitical turmoil as determinants may promote more tolerant attitudes towards people with mental illness. The findings hold implications for clinical practice and could aid in predicting the degree of stigma people with mental health conditions may face. Mental health practitioners, commentators, and policy-makers should be mindful of the potential negative implications of certain aetiological explanations.
... Theise in mental health problems has been linked to an increased focus on mental health and it has been seen as an opportunity to enhance mental health care services and prioritize mental health on the global agenda (Kola 2020, Moreno, Wykes et al. 2020, Hewlett, Takino et al. 2021, Latoo, Haddad et al. 2021, Zhu, Li et al. 2023. Preliminary evidence suggest that heightened interest in mental health may have contributed to a shift in public perception of mental health problems, resulting in more positive attitudes, perceptions and awareness about mental health and illness (O'Connor 2021, Bollettino, Foo et al. 2023, Huggard andO'Connor 2023). However, studies comparing mental health literacy or its components, such as stigma, before and after the Covid-19 pandemic are scarce and lack generalizability. ...
... We assume that the increase of mental health problems in the general population during the pandemic may have had an impact on individuals' mental health literacy and perception of mental health issues in themselves. This would be in line with research on the impact of Covid-19, which found increase in awareness of mental health issues and improvements in believes on the cause and development of mental illness (O'Connor 2021, Huggard andO'Connor 2023). While this connection cannot be conclusively established based on our study's data, it merits further investigation. ...
... From the perspective of mental health literacy, interpersonal relationships can significantly shape individuals' perceptions and attitudes towards mental illness (Huggard and O'Connor, 2023). Students with strong interpersonal relationships tend to have more robust social networks, allowing them to engage in more frequent interpersonal communication. ...
Introduction
With the increasing prevalence of mental health challenges among college students, understanding how family background and interpersonal dynamics affect mental health literacy is critical. This study examined the relationships between family socioeconomic status, mental health literacy, parenting styles, and interpersonal relationships among 1,107 college students.
Methods
Using an online questionnaire, the study explored how family socioeconomic status, parenting styles, and interpersonal relationships influence mental health literacy.
Results and discussion
The results showed that family socioeconomic status significantly and positively predicts mental health literacy. Both positive and negative parenting styles were found to partially mediate the relationship between family socioeconomic status and mental health literacy. Additionally, interpersonal relationships partially mediated this relationship. Finally, the study revealed that positive and negative parenting styles acted as sequential mediators between family socioeconomic status and mental health literacy through interpersonal relationships. These findings provide insights into the mechanisms by which family socioeconomic factors shape mental health literacy among college students.
Background
Stigmatisation of eating disorders can have debilitating consequences for sufferers, such as reduced help-seeking and physical and mental deterioration. Dispositional attribution of blame appears to be central to this stigmatisation. However, it remains unclear as to whether precise aspects of blame, such as control over and responsibility for the disorder, specifically contribute to these negative dispositional attributions. So, the current study sought to explore casual attribution patterns towards individuals with AN among the Irish adult public and investigate the associated impact of these attributions on stigmatising attitudes towards AN sufferers.
Methods
One-hundred and forty-seven participants (M = 36.63 years; SD = 14.46; 119 female) completed an online survey where they were initially randomly assigned to read either a blameworthy (n = 62) or unblameworthy (n = 85) vignette describing a fictional character with AN. Following this, participants completed two self-report inventories (Causal Attribution Scale and Eating Disorder Stigma Scale) measuring their causal attributions and stigma levels regarding the character. Mann-Whitney U tests and linear regression were completed to evaluate attitudinal differences across groups.
Results
Participants in the blameworthy condition significantly attributed more control over their illness to the AN character and held greater mean levels of stigma than participants in the unblameworthy condition. No significant differences were found between conditions for attributions of responsibility and blame. Finally, total causal attribution scores significantly predicted total stigma scores.
Conclusion
The findings indicate that stigma towards those with AN can result from negative attitudes where AN sufferers are viewed as being in control of their condition. Erroneous attribution of dispositional control can influence interpretations of the cause of AN and trigger inappropriate behavioural responses such as stigmatisation, which can have serious consequences for help-seeking in those with AN. Responsibility-based and broader blame-based dispositional attributions less influence stigmatisation.
