Cited by 25Mental Health and Patient InvolvementMental Health and PsychiatryParticipatory Visual Research Methods

Autovideography: the lived experience of recovery for adults with serious mental illness

Petros, Ryan, Solomon, Phyllis, Linz, Sheila, DeCesaris, Marissa, Hanrahan, Nancy P.·2016·Psychiatric Quarterly

Abstract

Mental health services have been transforming toward a recovery orientation for more than a decade, yet a robust understanding of recovery eludes many providers, and consensus on a conceptual definition has yet to be reached. This article examines mental health consumers' lived experience of recovery and evaluates the usefulness and comprehensiveness of CHIME, a major framework conceptually defining recovery for adults with serious mental illness. Researchers partnered with a mental health association in a major US city to engage in research with graduates of a recovery and education class for adults diagnosed with serious mental illness. Twelve participants were loaned video cameras and invited to "Tell us about your recovery" through autovideography. Of the 12 participants, six produced videos directly responding to the overall research question and were subsequently included in the present analysis. Data were analyzed thematically, and CHIME adequately represented the major domains presented in consumer videos with two notable modifications: subdomains of "reciprocity" within relationships and "contributing to others" were added to comprehensively represent consumer perspectives about recovery. Adding two subdomains to CHIME more effectively represents consumer narratives about recovery, contributes to the social construction of the personhood of people with serious mental illness, and offers a more robust description of the process of recovery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11126-015-9397-8

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Petros, R., Solomon, P., Linz, S., DeCesaris, M., & Hanrahan, N. P.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • Northeastern University (US)
Corresponding author
Petros, Ryan
Venue
Psychiatric Quarterly
Published
2015-10-27
Volume
87
Issue
3
Pages
417-426
ISSN
  • 0033-2720 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6709
OpenAlex
W2234898951
Cited by
25
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2016: 4
FWCI
2.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychiatric Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Center for Public Health Initiatives
  • Positive Psychology Center
  • Helene Fuld Health Trust, School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Participatory Visual Research Methods
Keywords
recovery-oriented mental health services, severe mental illness, lived experience of recovery, CHIME framework, mental health service users, customer perspective, personhood
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Social Support, Video Recording, Recovery of Function, Narration, Qualitative Research

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