Understanding Social Stigma, Stigma Resistance and the Mental Illness Identity

This project addresses social stigma and discrimination associated with mental illness by focusing on the ways that individuals with mental health concerns internalize negative stereotypes. In the first phase of the project, how perceived feedback from others relates to self-views is examined. Three sources of perceived feedback are considered: others in general (societal views), close family and friends (significant others), and others with mental illness (similar others).

In the second phase, the ways in which individuals resist social stigma by using different strategies to reduce discrepancies between self-views and perceived feedback are investigated. The methodological approach advances how social scientists measure identity and stigma. By identifying the conditions under which stigma resistance strategies help to reduce stigma’s damaging effects, this study has implications for improving the psychological well-being and recovery of individuals with mental illness.

This project uses a probability sample of 2000 adults, collected via a web-based panel platform that produces a nationally representative sample reflecting demographic patterns in the U.S. The sample includes individuals with diagnosed and undiagnosed mental health concerns. This sampling strategy allows variation in severity of mental illness symptoms and stability of self-views related to the mental illness identity and at the same time allows for generalizability of identity and stigma processes across social groups.

Respondents report on a range of attributes specifically associated with mental illness, as well an array of cognitive and behavioral strategies for combating stigma. Data analysis includes a comprehensive assessment of the proposed measures of identity and stigma. An integrated model of the mental illness identity that includes the role of stigma resistance is tested.

This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.