Cargando…

Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales

BACKGROUND: What people consider to be a mental disorder is likely to influence how they perceive others who are experiencing problems and whether they seek help for their own problems. However, no measure is available to assess individual differences in the expansiveness or breadth of concepts of m...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tse, Jesse S. Y., Haslam, Nick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10548567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37794333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-023-05152-6
_version_ 1785115295261655040
author Tse, Jesse S. Y.
Haslam, Nick
author_facet Tse, Jesse S. Y.
Haslam, Nick
author_sort Tse, Jesse S. Y.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: What people consider to be a mental disorder is likely to influence how they perceive others who are experiencing problems and whether they seek help for their own problems. However, no measure is available to assess individual differences in the expansiveness or breadth of concepts of mental disorder. Four studies aimed to develop and validate two such measures. The Concept Breadth-Vertical (CB-V) scale assesses variability in the severity threshold at which unusual behavior or experience is judged to reflect disorder, whereas the Concept Breadth-Horizontal (CB-H) scale assesses variability in the range of phenomena judged to be disorders. METHODS: In a pilot study (N = 201) for the CB-V, participants read vignettes of varying severity for each of the 10 mental disorders, and rated whether the subject had a disorder. Study 1 (N = 502) used exploratory factor analyses to examine 10 CB-V items from the pilot study and 20 vignette-based items for constructing the CB-H. Study 2 (N = 298) employed confirmatory factor analysis to validate the scales’ structure and examined their convergent validity with a measure of harm concept breadth and their discriminant validity with measures of mental health literacy. Study 3 (N = 298) explored associations of the scales with other mental health variables, including stigma and help-seeking attitudes. RESULTS: Study 1 supported the unifactorial structure of each item set, refined each set into a scale, and demonstrated acceptable reliabilities. Study 2 provided support for the scales’ convergent and discriminant validities. Study 3 showed that the scales were associated negatively with stigma, and positively with help-seeking attitudes and self-reported mental health problems. Studies 2 and 3 further indicated that younger and more politically liberal participants hold broader concepts of mental disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The new concept breadth scales are psychometrically sound measures of a promising new concept in the study of beliefs and attitudes about mental health. Potential future research directions are discussed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-023-05152-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10548567
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105485672023-10-05 Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales Tse, Jesse S. Y. Haslam, Nick BMC Psychiatry Research BACKGROUND: What people consider to be a mental disorder is likely to influence how they perceive others who are experiencing problems and whether they seek help for their own problems. However, no measure is available to assess individual differences in the expansiveness or breadth of concepts of mental disorder. Four studies aimed to develop and validate two such measures. The Concept Breadth-Vertical (CB-V) scale assesses variability in the severity threshold at which unusual behavior or experience is judged to reflect disorder, whereas the Concept Breadth-Horizontal (CB-H) scale assesses variability in the range of phenomena judged to be disorders. METHODS: In a pilot study (N = 201) for the CB-V, participants read vignettes of varying severity for each of the 10 mental disorders, and rated whether the subject had a disorder. Study 1 (N = 502) used exploratory factor analyses to examine 10 CB-V items from the pilot study and 20 vignette-based items for constructing the CB-H. Study 2 (N = 298) employed confirmatory factor analysis to validate the scales’ structure and examined their convergent validity with a measure of harm concept breadth and their discriminant validity with measures of mental health literacy. Study 3 (N = 298) explored associations of the scales with other mental health variables, including stigma and help-seeking attitudes. RESULTS: Study 1 supported the unifactorial structure of each item set, refined each set into a scale, and demonstrated acceptable reliabilities. Study 2 provided support for the scales’ convergent and discriminant validities. Study 3 showed that the scales were associated negatively with stigma, and positively with help-seeking attitudes and self-reported mental health problems. Studies 2 and 3 further indicated that younger and more politically liberal participants hold broader concepts of mental disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The new concept breadth scales are psychometrically sound measures of a promising new concept in the study of beliefs and attitudes about mental health. Potential future research directions are discussed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-023-05152-6. BioMed Central 2023-10-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10548567/ /pubmed/37794333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-023-05152-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Tse, Jesse S. Y.
Haslam, Nick
Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales
title Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales
title_full Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales
title_fullStr Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales
title_full_unstemmed Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales
title_short Individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales
title_sort individual differences in the expansiveness of mental disorder concepts: development and validation of concept breadth scales
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10548567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37794333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-023-05152-6
work_keys_str_mv AT tsejessesy individualdifferencesintheexpansivenessofmentaldisorderconceptsdevelopmentandvalidationofconceptbreadthscales
AT haslamnick individualdifferencesintheexpansivenessofmentaldisorderconceptsdevelopmentandvalidationofconceptbreadthscales