The Social Rejection of Former Mental Patients: Understanding Why Labels Matter

TLDR

Recent research shows that the key factor determining rejection of former mental patients is their behavior rather than stigmatized status, yet simple label assessments have little effect on social distance. The study aims to challenge the conclusion that behavior, not stigmatized status, determines rejection of former mental patients. It employs a vignette experiment that manipulates patient status and behavior to assess their impact on social distance. When perceived dangerousness is considered, labeling effects become strong: the label “previous hospitalization” increases social distance among those who view mental patients as dangerous but decreases it among those who do not, revealing that labels significantly influence perceptions and supporting labeling theory.

Abstract

Recent research shows that the crucial factor determining the rejection of former mental patients is their behavior rather than their stigmantized status. The study reported here, based on a vignette experiment (with a design that varies patient status with the nature of behavior), challenges this conclusion. Like previous research, it indicates that a simple assessment of labelings shows little effect on a social distance scale. However, when a measure of perceived dangerousness of mental patients is introduced, strong labeling effects emerge. Specifically, the data reveal that the lable of "previous hospitalization" fosters high social distance among those who perceive mental patients to be dangerous and low social distance among those who do not see patients as a threat. It appears that past investigators have missed these effects because they have averaged excessively lenient responses with excessively rejecting ones. This suggests that labels play an important role in how former mental patients are perceived and that labeling theory should not be dismissed as a framework for understanding social factors in mental illness.