↓ Skip to main content

The Depression Schema: How Labels, Features, and Causal Explanations Affect Lay Conceptions of Depression

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
37 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 Depression Schema: How Labels, Features, and Causal Explanations Affect Lay Conceptions of Depression
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01728
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul H. Thibodeau, Mira J. Fein, Elizabeth S. Goodbody, Stephen J. Flusberg

Abstract

Depression is a common clinical disorder characterized by a complex web of psychological, behavioral, and neurological causes and symptoms. Here we investigate everyday beliefs and attitudes about depression, as well as the factors that shape the depression schemas people hold. In each of three studies, participants read about a person experiencing several symptoms of depression and answered questions about their conception of the disorder. In some cases the symptoms were presented in isolation while in other cases the symptoms were presented with a diagnostic label and/or descriptions of its possible causes (e.g., genes versus personal experience). Results indicated that beliefs and attitudes toward depression were largely shaped by individual difference factors (e.g., personal experience, political ideology) and that the experimental manipulations primarily impacted attributions of responsibility and suggestions for a course of treatment. These findings represent an important advance in our understanding of the factors that influence the folk psychiatry of depression and help inform theories of schema formation for abstract and complex domains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 32%
Social Sciences 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 11 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 26 May 2019.
All research outputs
#3,200,918
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,906
of 29,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,115
of 386,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#101
of 441 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 386,426 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 441 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.