Cited by 273Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsPsychiatric care and mental health servicesEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Perceived Coercion in Mental Hospital Admission: Pressures and Process

Lidz, Charles W.·1995·Archives of General Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients' perceptions of coercion in admission may affect their attitude toward subsequent treatment, including their inclination to adhere to treatment plans. This study looks at the determinants of patients' perceptions of coercion. METHODS: A sample of 157 patients admitted to a rural Virginia state hospital and a Pennsylvania community hospital were interviewed within 48 hours of admission about their experience of coming to the hospital. All subjects were 17 years or older. Diagnoses were diverse, and 42% were involuntarily committed. The interview gathered an open-ended description of the admission experience followed by a structured interview that included several measures. RESULTS: Perceptions of being respectfully included in a fair decision-making process ("procedural justice") and legal status were most closely associated with perceived coercion, and a significant relationship was found with perceived negative pressures, ie, force and threats. However, only procedural justice was related to the perception of coercion at both sites and with both voluntary and involuntary patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' feelings of being coerced concerning admission appears to be closely related to their sense of procedural justice. It may be that clinicians can minimize the experience of coercion even among those legally committed by attending more closely to procedural justice issues.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpsyc.1995.03950240052010

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Numerous quantitative studies have found an inverse relationship between levels of procedural justice and levels of perceived coercion.

    “Numerous quantitative studies have found an inverse relationship between levels of procedural justice and levels of perceived coercion [15,24,34,38,42,45,48,54,55,65,92,95,105,107,147,156].”
  • Four studies specifically reported that a lack of procedural justice heightened perceived coercion even among voluntarily admitted patients.

    “Four studies specifically reported that a lack of procedural justice heightened perceived coercion even among voluntarily admitted patients [24,34,42,105].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 24 · Cited by 273

Authors
Lidz, C. W.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Lidz, Charles W.
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Published
1995-12-01
Volume
52
Issue
12
Pages
1034
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2140563328
Cited by
273
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 6
FWCI
8.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Network (American Medical Association) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
perceived coercion, involuntary psychiatric admission, procedural justice, patient perspectives, legal status, voluntary admission, medication adherence
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Coercion, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Perception, Regression Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review