Time Waits for No One: Longitudinal Study on the Effects of an Anti-Stigma Seminar on the Psychology Student Population.

Luca Pingani,Anna Maria Nasi,Gian Maria Galeazzi,Sara Evans-Lacko,Alessandro Musetti,Silvia Ferrari,Maria Filosa,Tommaso Manari,Mattia Lorenzini,Christian Franceschini,Sandra Coriani

doi:10.3390/ijerph18105441

Abstract

The primary aim is to describe the changes in the knowledge of mental health conditions, the attitudes toward the mentally ill, and the intended behaviour towards people with mental illness among the entire student population of the third year of a degree course in Psychology. A total of 570 students attended a seminar on stigma towards mental illness and were invited to complete an online survey which collected data on sociodemographic characteristics and three validated questionnaires evaluating different aspects of stigma at three different time points (pre-intervention, post-intervention, and at one year follow up). A total of 253 students (44.39%) completed the questionnaires at t0, t1, and t2. The mean age of the sample was 23.7 (SD = ±5.89), and 86.96% (n = 220) were females. Between t0 and t1, a statistically significant improvement was observed for all three outcomes, while the intended behaviour outcome was no longer significant between t1 and t2 (Z = −0.70; p = 0.48). Females and who participated live at the seminar maintained a significant knowledge of mental illness and a better attitude toward community mental health care. The effects of the seminar focused on reducing stigma tended to diminish over time at one year follow-up, particular in relation to intended behaviour.

Highlights

Goffman’s first definition, thanks to the advances highlighted in the research, was further developed by Link and Phelan, who described the constituent components of the stigma process: labelling, stereotyping separation, status loss, and discrimination [2,3]
The homogeneity test failed by comparing the gender of the student population of the two academic years (A.Y. 2018/2019 and 2019/2020): the percentage of female students is slightly higher in the A.Y. 2019/2020 (89.51% vs. 92.64%)
In a previous study that considered a psychology student population [35], we found that there was no association between having a family member with a mental health problem and knowledge of different clinical conditions

Summary

Introduction

In 1963, the American sociologist Goffman used the term “stigma” to indicate those attributes (ethnic, religious, physical, etc.) that connoted those who owned them as “... Tainted, discounted one” [1]. Goffman’s first definition, thanks to the advances highlighted in the research, was further developed by Link and Phelan, who described the constituent components of the stigma process: labelling, stereotyping separation, status loss, and discrimination [2,3]. Lack of knowledge generates stereotypes that are assimilated and considered as truthful by the general population (mental health literacy). Agreement with the stereotype can result in a particular attitude, for example, fear of whether people with a mental illness are considered dangerous or capable of violent actions.

Results

Discussion

Conclusion