↓ Skip to main content

“Depression is who I am”: Mental illness identity, stigma and wellbeing

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Affective Disorders, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
101 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
262 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
“Depression is who I am”: Mental illness identity, stigma and wellbeing
Published in
Journal of Affective Disorders, September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2015.09.012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tegan Cruwys, Sathiavaani Gunaseelan

Abstract

Previous research has found that in the face of discrimination, people tend to identify more strongly with stigmatized groups. Social identification can, in turn, buffer wellbeing against the negative consequences of discrimination. However, this rejection identification model has never been tested in the context of mental illness identity. A survey was conducted with 250 people with diagnosed depression or current symptoms of at least moderate clinical severity. Experiencing mental illness stigma was associated with poorer wellbeing. Furthermore, people who had experienced such stigma were more likely to identify as a depressed person. Social identification as depressed magnified, rather than buffered, the relationship between stigma and reduced wellbeing. This relationship was moderated by perceived social norms of the depressed group for engaging in depressive thoughts and behaviors. These findings suggest that mental illness stigma is a double-edged sword: as well as the direct harms for wellbeing, by increasing identification with other mental illness sufferers, stigma might expose sufferers to harmful social influence processes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 262 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 258 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 41 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 15%
Student > Bachelor 40 15%
Researcher 19 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 5%
Other 43 16%
Unknown 65 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 104 40%
Social Sciences 23 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 4%
Computer Science 4 2%
Other 27 10%
Unknown 76 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 30 July 2020.
All research outputs
#4,159,040
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Affective Disorders
#2,573
of 10,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,295
of 279,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Affective Disorders
#40
of 196 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,146 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 279,269 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 196 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.