Cited by 1,407Mental Health Treatment and AccessSocial and Intergroup PsychologyPsychology and Mental Health

An Attribution Model of Public Discrimination Towards Persons with Mental Illness

Corrigan, Patrick, Markowitz, Fred E., Watson, Amy, Rowan, David, Kubiak, Mary Ann·2003·Journal of Health and Social Behavior

Abstract

In this study, we build on previous work by developing and estimating a model of the relationships between causal attributions (e.g., controllability, responsibility), familiarity with mental illness, dangerousness, emotional responses (e.g., pity, anger, fear), and helping and rejecting responses. Using survey data containing responses to hypothetical vignettes, we examine these relationships in a sample of 518 community college students. Consistent with attribution theory, causal attributions affect beliefs about persons' responsibility for causing their condition, beliefs which in turn lead to affective reactions, resulting in rejecting responses such as avoidance, coercion, segregation, and withholding help. However, consistent with a danger appraisal hypothesis, the effects of perceptions of dangerousness on helping and rejecting responses are unmediated by responsibility beliefs. Much of the dangerousness effects operate by increasing fear, a particularly strong predictor of support for coercive treatment. The results from this study also suggest that familiarity with mental illness reduces discriminatory responses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1519806

Cites

81 of 81 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
Corrigan, P., Markowitz, F. E., Watson, A., Rowan, D., & Kubiak, M. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Northern Illinois University (US)
  • Prairie State College (US)
Venue
Journal of Health and Social Behavior
Published
2003-06
Volume
44
Issue
2
Pages
162
ISSN
0022-1465 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104804522
Cited by
1,407
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 73 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 83 · 2023: 88 · 2022: 95 · 2021: 123 · 2020: 99 · 2019: 85 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 71 · 2016: 76 · 2015: 63 · 2014: 56 · 2013: 50 · 2012: 52
FWCI
19.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Health and Social Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r24mh062198-06)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (5 R24 MH62198)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
Keywords
mental illness, causal attribution, attribution theory, perceived dangerousness, responsibility beliefs, fear, pity, anger, rejection response, involuntary treatment, segregation, community college students, stigma
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude to Health, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Prejudice, Social Environment, Stereotyping, Students, Universities, Midwestern United States, Behavioral 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