↓ Skip to main content

The ‘side effects’ of medicalization: A meta-analytic review of how biogenetic explanations affect stigma

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Psychology Review, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
8 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
84 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
332 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
370 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The ‘side effects’ of medicalization: A meta-analytic review of how biogenetic explanations affect stigma
Published in
Clinical Psychology Review, June 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2013.06.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erlend P. Kvaale, Nick Haslam, William H. Gottdiener

Abstract

Reducing stigma is crucial for facilitating recovery from psychological problems. Viewing these problems biomedically may reduce the tendency to blame affected persons, but critics have cautioned that it could also increase other facets of stigma. We report on the first meta-analytic review of the effects of biogenetic explanations on stigma. A comprehensive search yielded 28 eligible experimental studies. Four separate meta-analyses (Ns=1207-3469) assessed the effects of biogenetic explanations on blame, perceived dangerousness, social distance, and prognostic pessimism. We found that biogenetic explanations reduce blame (Hedges g=-0.324) but induce pessimism (Hedges g=0.263). We also found that biogenetic explanations increase endorsement of the stereotype that people with psychological problems are dangerous (Hedges g=0.198), although this result could reflect publication bias. Finally, we found that biogenetic explanations do not typically affect social distance. Promoting biogenetic explanations to alleviate blame may induce pessimism and set the stage for self-fulfilling prophecies that could hamper recovery from psychological problems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 84 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 370 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 3 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 359 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 63 17%
Student > Master 62 17%
Student > Bachelor 58 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 31 8%
Researcher 28 8%
Other 61 16%
Unknown 67 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 168 45%
Social Sciences 42 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 2%
Other 37 10%
Unknown 79 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 177. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 November 2023.
All research outputs
#228,884
of 25,562,515 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Psychology Review
#57
of 1,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,453
of 209,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Psychology Review
#2
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,562,515 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,569 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 209,766 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.