An Attribution Model of Public Discrimination Towards Persons with Mental Illness

TLDR

Attribution theory predicts that causal beliefs shape responsibility judgments, which drive affective reactions and lead to rejecting responses such as avoidance, coercion, segregation, and withholding help. The study develops and estimates a model linking causal attributions, familiarity, dangerousness, emotions, and helping/rejecting responses toward persons with mental illness. The model is estimated using survey data from 518 community college students responding to hypothetical vignettes. Perceptions of dangerousness influence helping and rejecting responses directly, largely through heightened fear that predicts support for coercive treatment, while greater familiarity with mental illness reduces discriminatory responses.

Abstract

In this study, we build on previous work by developing and estimating a model of the relationships between causal attributions (e.g., controllability, responsibility), familiarity with mental illness, dangerousness, emotional responses (e.g., pity, anger, fear), and helping and rejecting responses. Using survey data containing responses to hypothetical vignettes, we examine these relationships in a sample of 518 community college students. Consistent with attribution theory, causal attributions affect beliefs about persons' responsibility for causing their condition, beliefs which in turn lead to affective reactions, resulting in rejecting responses such as avoidance, coercion, segregation, and withholding help. However, consistent with a danger appraisal hypothesis, the effects of perceptions of dangerousness on helping and rejecting responses are unmediated by responsibility beliefs. Much of the dangerousness effects operate by increasing fear, a particularly strong predictor of support for coercive treatment. The results from this study also suggest that familiarity with mental illness reduces discriminatory responses.