↓ Skip to main content

The Development of an Empirical Model of Mental Health Stigma in Adolescents

Overview of attention for article published in Psychiatry Research, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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 Development of an Empirical Model of Mental Health Stigma in Adolescents
Published in
Psychiatry Research, May 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.psychres.2016.05.033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Silke, Lorraine Swords, Caroline Heary

Abstract

Research on mental health stigma in adolescents is hampered by a lack of empirical investigation into the theoretical conceptualisation of stigma, as well as by the lack of validated stigma measures. This research aims to develop a model of public stigma toward depression in adolescents and to use this model to empirically examine whether stigma is composed of three separate dimensions (Stereotypes, Prejudice and Discrimination), as is theoretically proposed. Adolescents completed self-report measures assessing their stigmatising responses toward a fictional peer with depression. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA; N=332) was carried out on 58-items, which proposed to measure aspects of stigma. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA; N=236) was then carried out to evaluate the validity of the observed stigma model. Finally, higher-order CFAs were conducted in order to assess whether the observed model supported the tripartite conceptualisation of stigma. The EFA returned a seven-factor model of stigma. These factors were designated as Dangerousness, Warmth & Competency, Responsibility, Negative Attributes, Prejudice, Classroom Discrimination and Friendship Discrimination. The CFA supported the goodness-of-fit of this seven-factor model. The higher-order CFAs indicated that these seven factors represented the latent constructs of, Stereotypes, Prejudice and Discrimination, which in turn represented Stigma. Overall, results support the tripartite conceptualisation of stigma and suggest that measurements of mental health stigma in adolescents should include assessments of all three dimensions. These results also highlight the importance of establishing valid and reliable measures for assessing stigma in adolescents.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 19%
Student > Bachelor 16 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 18%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 36 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 22 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,847,541
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Psychiatry Research
#2,166
of 7,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,552
of 353,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychiatry Research
#42
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,587 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 353,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.