↓ Skip to main content

Examining Effects of Anticipated Stigma, Centrality, Salience, Internalization, and Outness on Psychological Distress for People with Concealable Stigmatized Identities

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2014
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
158 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
299 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
Examining Effects of Anticipated Stigma, Centrality, Salience, Internalization, and Outness on Psychological Distress for People with Concealable Stigmatized Identities
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0096977
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diane M. Quinn, Michelle K. Williams, Francisco Quintana, Jennifer L. Gaskins, Nicole M. Overstreet, Alefiyah Pishori, Valerie A. Earnshaw, Giselle Perez, Stephenie R. Chaudoir

Abstract

Understanding how stigmatized identities contribute to increased rates of depression and anxiety is critical to stigma reduction and mental health treatment. There has been little research testing multiple aspects of stigmatized identities simultaneously. In the current study, we collected data from a diverse, urban, adult community sample of people with a concealed stigmatized identity (CSI). We targeted 5 specific CSIs--mental illness, substance abuse, experience of domestic violence, experience of sexual assault, and experience of childhood abuse--that have been shown to put people at risk for increased psychological distress. We collected measures of the anticipation of being devalued by others if the identity became known (anticipated stigma), the level of defining oneself by the stigmatized identity (centrality), the frequency of thinking about the identity (salience), the extent of agreement with negative stereotypes about the identity (internalized stigma), and extent to which other people currently know about the identity (outness). Results showed that greater anticipated stigma, greater identity salience, and lower levels of outness each uniquely and significantly predicted variance in increased psychological distress (a composite of depression and anxiety). In examining communalities and differences across the five identities, we found that mean levels of the stigma variables differed across the identities, with people with substance abuse and mental illness reporting greater anticipated and internalized stigma. However, the prediction pattern of the variables for psychological distress was similar across the substance abuse, mental illness, domestic violence, and childhood abuse identities (but not sexual assault). Understanding which components of stigmatized identities predict distress can lead to more effective treatment for people experiencing psychological distress.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 299 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 291 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 20%
Student > Bachelor 41 14%
Student > Master 40 13%
Researcher 30 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 10%
Other 35 12%
Unknown 63 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 110 37%
Social Sciences 40 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 25 8%
Unknown 76 25%
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 11 September 2015.
All research outputs
#3,516,828
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#42,959
of 194,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,983
of 227,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#948
of 4,702 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,177 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 227,219 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,702 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.