Validation of a short instrument to measure stigmatised attitudes towards mental illness
Open accessAbstract
Aims and Method One of the steps to change stigmatised attitudes involves identifying the concerns of people whose attitude is to be changed. This paper presents the Attitudes to Mental Illness Questionnaire (AMIQ), a short instrument aimed at systematically obtaining this information, and examines the feasibility, test–retest reliability as well as face and construct validity of the AMIQ on the UK general public. A postal survey of a random sample of 1079 adults was conducted. A self-reported questionnaire with 5-point Likert scale responses was validated in response to short fictional vignettes. A second subsample of 256 was used for a reliability test. Results The AMIQ is a short instrument with good psychometric properties. It shows good stability, test–retest reliability, alternative test reliability, face, construct and criterion validity. The self-selecting sample of 1079 UK adults showed highly stigmatised attitudes to people with addictive disorders but more positive attitudes to those with depression or self-harm. Results from a smaller follow-up sample showed that attitudes towards people with alcohol dependence and schizophrenia were intermediate. Clinical Implications The AMIQ can be used in various medical and mental health stigma research and intervention settings.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Stigmatising attitudes were primarily assessed with Social Distance Scales based on Link et al and Personal Stigma Scales based on Griffiths et al, and other validated stigma scales.
“Stigmatising attitudes towards people with mental health problems were primarily assessed with Social Distance Scales based on Link et al[26] and Personal Stigma Scales based on Griffiths et al [27]. Other validated stigma scales included the Attitudes to Mental Illness Scale,[28] Opening Minds Scale for Healthcare Providers[29] and the Personal Attributes scale [30].”
From Systematic review and meta-analysis of Mental Health First Aid training: Effects on knowledge, stigma, and helping behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as [28]
Cites
A Modified Labeling Theory Approach to Mental Disorders: An Empirical Assessment
Link, B. G., Cullen, F. T., Struening, E., Shrout, P. E., & Dohrenwend, B. P. (1989) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095613 · Cited by 1,935 · see citing works
An Attribution Model of Public Discrimination Towards Persons with Mental Illness
Corrigan, P., Markowitz, F. E., Watson, A., Rowan, D., & Kubiak, M. A. (2003) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.2307/1519806 · Cited by 1,407 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mental health literacy measures evaluating knowledge, attitudes and help-seeking: a scoping review
Wei, Y., McGrath, P. J., Hayden, J., & Kutcher, S. (2015) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-015-0681-9 · Cited by 500 · see citing works
Morgan, A. J., Ross, A., & Reavley, N. J. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0197102 · Cited by 461 · see citing works
“Other validated stigma scales included the Attitudes to Mental Illness Scale,[28] Opening Minds Scale for Healthcare Providers[29] and the Personal Attributes scale [30].”
MethodPublic awareness, attitudes and beliefs regarding intellectual disability: a systematic review
Scior, K. (2011) · Research in Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2011.07.005 · Cited by 415 · see citing works
Dias, P., Campos, L., Almeida, H., & Palha, F. (2018) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph15071318 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
Mental health education programmes for generalist health professionals: an integrative review
Brunero, S., Jeon, Y., & Foster, K. (2012) · International Journal of Mental Health Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1447-0349.2011.00802.x · Cited by 46 · see citing works
- Authors
- Luty, J., Fekadu, D., Umoh, O., & Gallagher, J.
- Affiliations
- Maudsley Hospital (GB)
- Venue
- Psychiatric Bulletin
- Publisher
- Royal College of Psychiatrists
- Published
- 2006-07
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 257-260
- ISSN
- 0955-6036 (ISSN-L)
- 1472-1473
- OpenAlex
- W2125181667
- Cited by
- 134
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 4.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Psychiatric Bulletin (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- mental health stigma, questionnaire validation, test-retest reliability, construct validity, face validity, criterion validity, public attitudes, alcoholism, schizophrenia, depression, self-harm, addiction
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
