CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 96Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsGender Roles and Identity StudiesMental Health Treatment and Access

Men In and Out of Treatment for Depression: Strategies for Improved Engagement

Seidler, Zac E., Rice, Simon M., Oliffe, John L., Fogarty, Andrea S., Dhillon, Haryana M.·2018·Australian Psychologist
DOI 10.1111/ap.12331
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

ObjectiveWhile the prevalence of major depressive disorder continues to rise, many men are reticent to seek and sustain psychotherapy. The current study explored Australian men's experiences with treatment for depression with a view to guiding recommendations for improving treatment engagement.MethodTwenty men (23–64-years) who had received psychotherapy for depressive symptoms in the past 3-years took part in individual, semi‐structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded in line with interpretive descriptive methodologies.ResultsFindings suggested men's preference for a transparent orientation to treatment, including the provision of a clear structure for therapy. Men's preferred structure included focusing on individualised goals and expected progress, establishment of trust, and a sharing of decisional control. Providing an action‐oriented functional treatment with targeted skills attainment was recommended as most engaging. The focus on “doing” in treatment, as distinct from pure talk therapy, engendered feelings of strength and empowerment in the men, bridging self‐management of symptoms and wellness. Most participants, however, did not receive a treatment style that properly engaged them, and articulated clear recommendations for changes needed.ConclusionsFindings highlight the potential for development and dissemination of gender sensitive, strength‐based clinical training and treatment options for better engaging men in psychotherapy for depression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ap.12331

Cites

54 of 54 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?

  • Individuals who identify as male have expressed hesitation around psychotherapy and help-seeking for psychological distress in past literature, including those with IBD.

    “Individuals who identify as male have expressed hesitation around psychotherapy and help-seeking for psychological distress in past literature, including those with IBD (Dober et al., 2021; Seidler et al., 2018).”

    From Moving Towards Acceptance and Values: A Qualitative Study of ACTforIBD Compared to IBD Psychoeducation (2024) · cites this paper as Seidler et al., 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Seidler, Z. E., Rice, S. M., Oliffe, J. L., Fogarty, A. S., & Dhillon, H. M.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
ORCID
Venue
Australian Psychologist
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2018-10-01
Volume
53
Issue
5
Pages
405-415
ISSN
  • 0005-0067 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-9544
DOI
10.1111/ap.12331
OpenAlex
W2765589571
Cited by
96
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
6.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Australian Psychologist (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
male depression, treatment engagement, psychotherapy, gender differences in help-seeking, treatment preferences, treatment structure, trust in therapy, shared decision-making, skills training, empowerment, strengths-based approach, self-management

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