IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v56y2003i2p299-312.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subjective experiences of stigma. A focus group study of schizophrenic patients, their relatives and mental health professionals

Author

Listed:
  • Schulze, Beate
  • Angermeyer, Matthias C.

Abstract

Schizophrenia has been found to be one of the most stigmatising conditions. To the present, most research on stigma related to mental illness has drawn conclusions on the adverse reactions faced by people with schizophrenia from studies on public attitudes or analogue behavioural studies. The views of those exposed to the stigmatising reactions, however, has largely been absent. Aiming to explore stigma from the subjective perspective of people with schizophrenia, a focus group study was carried out at the four centres involved in the WPA Global Programme against Stigma and Discrimination because of Schizophrenia in Germany. In order to get a comprehensive picture of how stigma affects the lives of schizophrenic patients, collateral information was sought from relatives and mental health professionals. The focus groups enquired about concrete stigmatisation experiences of the patients and incidences of stigma witnessed by the other two groups. Focus group sessions were tape-recorded and transcripts were coded using an inductive method. Results reveal four dimensions of stigma: interpersonal interaction, structural discrimination, public images of mental illness and access to social roles. Examples are given for the views of patients, relatives and mental health professionals on each of the four stigma types. The consequences for conceptualisations of stigma and the development of effective strategies to reduce stigma and discrimination because of schizophrenia are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Schulze, Beate & Angermeyer, Matthias C., 2003. "Subjective experiences of stigma. A focus group study of schizophrenic patients, their relatives and mental health professionals," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 299-312, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:2:p:299-312
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(02)00028-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:2:p:299-312. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.