Ross M G Norman1,2, Yixian Li3, Richard Sorrentino3, Elizabeth Hampson4,3, Yang Ye5. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Western University, A2-648, 800 Commissioners Road, East London, ON, Canada, N6A 5W9. rnorman@uwo.ca. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Western University, London, ON, Canada. rnorman@uwo.ca. 3. Department of Psychology, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Western University, A2-648, 800 Commissioners Road, East London, ON, Canada, N6A 5W9. 5. Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We extend investigations of the impact of the content of video contact with an individual with schizophrenia on stigma reduction. We examine whether differential impacts persist over a 2-week period and the extent to which they are mediated by perceived similarity and feelings of empathy and/or sympathy. METHOD: We used a randomized control trial wherein participants were exposed to a video in which an individual described his recovery from schizophrenia, or the same person described acute symptoms of schizophrenia, or a no-video control condition. Outcomes included impressions of and preferred social distance to the person in the video and people in general with schizophrenia and well as perceptions of similarity and feelings of sympathy and empathy. We also measured an overt behaviour, seating distance, at 2-week follow-up. RESULTS: The recovery-focused material was generally more effective in improving impressions and reducing preferred level of social distance. Although the symptom-focused video resulted in great sympathy for the person, this did not translate into positive impressions or reduced social distance. Mediational analyses yielded findings consistent with the benefits of the recovery video being mediated by increased perceptions of similarity and lower feelings of sympathy. Exposure to the recovery-focused video resulted in less anxiety in anticipation of meeting the person in the video relative to the control condition. CONCLUSIONS: Video contact emphasizing potential for recovery from schizophrenia was more effective in reducing stigmatizing responses than contact highlighting acute symptoms. Increased sympathy does not necessarily translate into reductions in stigma.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We extend investigations of the impact of the content of video contact with an individual with schizophrenia on stigma reduction. We examine whether differential impacts persist over a 2-week period and the extent to which they are mediated by perceived similarity and feelings of empathy and/or sympathy. METHOD: We used a randomized control trial wherein participants were exposed to a video in which an individual described his recovery from schizophrenia, or the same person described acute symptoms of schizophrenia, or a no-video control condition. Outcomes included impressions of and preferred social distance to the person in the video and people in general with schizophrenia and well as perceptions of similarity and feelings of sympathy and empathy. We also measured an overt behaviour, seating distance, at 2-week follow-up. RESULTS: The recovery-focused material was generally more effective in improving impressions and reducing preferred level of social distance. Although the symptom-focused video resulted in great sympathy for the person, this did not translate into positive impressions or reduced social distance. Mediational analyses yielded findings consistent with the benefits of the recovery video being mediated by increased perceptions of similarity and lower feelings of sympathy. Exposure to the recovery-focused video resulted in less anxiety in anticipation of meeting the person in the video relative to the control condition. CONCLUSIONS: Video contact emphasizing potential for recovery from schizophrenia was more effective in reducing stigmatizing responses than contact highlighting acute symptoms. Increased sympathy does not necessarily translate into reductions in stigma.
Entities:
Keywords:
Attitudes; Contact; Social distance; Stigma
Authors: M Janoušková; E Tušková; A Weissová; P Trančík; J Pasz; S Evans-Lacko; P Winkler Journal: Eur Psychiatry Date: 2017-02-03 Impact factor: 5.361
Authors: G Schomerus; M C Angermeyer; S E Baumeister; S Stolzenburg; B G Link; J C Phelan Journal: Eur Psychiatry Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 5.361
Authors: Sarah Clement; Adrienne van Nieuwenhuizen; Aliya Kassam; Clare Flach; Anisha Lazarus; Melanie de Castro; Paul McCrone; Ian Norman; Graham Thornicroft Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2011-12-08 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: N Mehta; S Clement; E Marcus; A-C Stona; N Bezborodovs; S Evans-Lacko; J Palacios; M Docherty; E Barley; D Rose; M Koschorke; R Shidhaye; C Henderson; G Thornicroft Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: M Gruber; T Rumpold; B Schrank; I Sibitz; B Otzelberger; R Jahn; M Amering; A Unger Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 6.892