Destigmatising Generalised Anxiety Disorder: The Differential Effects of Causal Explanations on Stigma

Authors: John McDowall, Lucy Lightfoot

Abstract:

Stigma constitutes a significant barrier to the recovery and social integration of individuals affected by mental illness. Although there is some debate in the literature regarding the definition and utility of stigma as a concept, it is widely accepted that it comprises three components: stereotypical beliefs, prejudicial reactions, and discrimination. Stereotypical beliefs describe the cognitive knowledge-based component of stigma, referring to beliefs (often negative) about members of a group that is based on cultural and societal norms (e.g. ‘People with anxiety are just weak’). Prejudice refers to the affective/evaluative component of stigma and describes the endorsement of negative stereotypes and the resulting negative emotional reactions (e.g. ‘People with anxiety are just weak, and they frustrate me’). Discrimination refers to the behavioural component of stigma, which is arguably the most problematic, as it exerts a direct effect on the stigmatized person and may lead people to behave in a hostile or avoidant way towards them (i.e. refusal to hire them). Research exploring anti-stigma initiatives focus primarily on an educational approach, with the view that accurate information will replace misconceptions and decrease stigma. Many approaches take a biogenetic stance, emphasising brain and biochemical deficits - the idea being that ‘mental illness is an illness like any other.' While this approach tends to effectively reduce blame, it has also demonstrated negative effects such as increasing prognostic pessimism, the desire for social distance and perceptions of stereotypes. In the present study 144 participants were split into three groups and read one of three vignettes presenting causal explanations for Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD): One explanation emphasized biogenetic factors as being important in the etiology of GAD, another emphasised psychosocial factors (e.g. aversive life events, poverty, etc.), and a third stressed the adaptive features of the disorder from an evolutionary viewpoint. A variety of measures tapping the various components of stigma were administered following the vignettes. No difference in stigma measures as a function of causal explanation was found. People who had contact with mental illness in the past were significantly less stigmatising across a wide range of measures, but this did not interact with the type of causal explanation.

Keywords: generalised anxiety disorder, discrimination, prejudice, stigma