Causal Explanations, Treatability, and Mental Illness Stigma: Experimental Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to test the effects of causal explanations, information about treatability, and type of psychiatric diagnosis on how the public reacts to an individual described as having a specific mental illness versus subclinical distress. METHODS: A 5 (mental health condition) × 2 (treatability) × 4 (causal explanation) vignette experiment was embedded in an online survey, followed by assessments of prognostic optimism and desire to maintain social distance from the vignette character. Data were collected, in late 2022, from a probability sample (N=1,607) representative of the U.S. adult population. Ordinary least-squares regression was used to estimate the effects of the experimental conditions, covariates, and interactions on respondents' desire for social distance and their prognostic optimism. RESULTS: Attribution of mental illness to a genetic predisposition (vs. no attribution) significantly (p<0.001) predicted unwillingness to socially interact with the vignette character, regardless of the character's psychiatric diagnosis. Describing the illness as treatable with medication or psychotherapy (vs. no treatability information) also reduced willingness to socially interact, yet it also increased optimism for recovery. Desire for social distance and prognostic pessimism were greater for alcohol use disorder, opioid use disorder, or schizophrenia compared with major depression or subclinical distress. CONCLUSIONS: Attributing mental illness solely to genetics predicts social rejection of people diagnosed as having psychiatric disorders. Efforts to reduce stigma, increase social acceptance, and protect the mental health of individuals diagnosed as having a mental illness should include not framing mental illness exclusively in genetic terms.

Revisiting the Black-White Mental Health Paradox During the Coronavirus Pandemic.

Black Americans have lower rates of depression and anxiety than Whites, despite greater exposure to stressors known to negatively impact mental health, characterized as the Black-White mental health paradox. This study revisited the paradox during the coronavirus pandemic. Drawing on stress process theory, minority stress theory, and the rejection-identification model of discrimination, in-group identity, and well-being, we analyzed original survey data from a quota sample of African American and White adults (N = 594). The survey included a range of stressors and coping resources, including those relevant to the pandemic (e.g., COVID-19 illness) and race (e.g., witnessing anti-Black police violence). Results indicate that despite African Americans' greater exposure and vulnerability to racial discrimination, the Black-White mental health paradox holds, owing in part to protective effects of African American's higher self-esteem. Directions for future exploration of the paradox are presented based on this study's findings.

The feasibility of a behavioral group intervention after weight-loss surgery: A randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Formal psychosocial support programs after weight-loss surgery are limited in scope and availability. OBJECTIVE: This randomized pilot study evaluated the feasibility of a postoperative behavioral intervention program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Postoperative weight-loss surgery patients (N = 50) were recruited from February 2017-July 2017 and randomized to a four-month behavioral program or usual care wait-list. Outcomes evaluated in addition to feasibility included health-related quality of life (Short Form -36), psychosocial functioning and adherence. Secondary outcomes included within-group changes for each outcome. RESULTS: Out of eight possible sessions, intervention participants attended a mean of 4.2 sessions. Intervention group participants experienced greater improvements in the social functioning domain of health-related quality of life compared to usual care. Self-reported dietary adherence in the intervention group remained stable, while usual care group dietary adherence declined. Within the intervention group, participants also reported gains in the physical function, pain and general health aspects of quality life from baseline to post-treatment. No differences in weight, mood or other eating behaviors (e.g., loss of control, emotional eating) were evident between groups. CONCLUSION: Though participation in a postoperative behavioral intervention varied, the program helped participants to maintain aspects of quality of life and self-reported adherence to dietary recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03092479.