IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0246341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Negative self-appraisal: Personal reasons for dying as indicators of suicidality

Author

Listed:
  • Julian Madsen
  • Keith M Harris

Abstract

Reasons for dying (RFD) are one of the most authentic factors illustrating the lived experience of suicidal individuals. However, the field has been criticized for inadequate evaluation of risk factors and suicidal symptoms, such as RFD, to develop more robust theoretical models and risk assessments. In this study, we aimed to critically examine RFD themes as predictors of suicidal symptoms to improve our understanding of the suicidal mind, test suicide theory validity and improve risk assessment. This cross-sectional mixed-method study included anonymous survey data (N = 713) with a subsample (n = 474; 77% female; age M = 31.48, SD = 13.53) who provided RFD. Participants were asked to write down five RFD (ranked 1st to 5th most important) and completed the Suicidal Affect-Behavior-Cognition Scale (SABCS). Thematic analysis revealed eight valid RFD themes—Negative Self-appraisal, Hopelessness, Desire to Escape, Escape Pain, Relationships, Loneliness, Financial Hardship, and Physical Health. Themes were quantified by rank and total endorsements of the theme. Hierarchical regression modelling, statistically controlling for demographics, showed all RFD themes, except Physical Health, were positive predictors of suicidality, accounting for 26% of variance in suicidal symptoms. Negative Self-appraisal was the strongest predictor. RFD differences were also found by gender, age and education. From these findings, we determined current suicide theories do not fully account for suicidal persons’ RFD. There is a pressing need for more critical review of current theories, as current theories only partially represent this key attribute of the suicidal mind, and none of the reviewed theories accurately reflected suicidal participants’ RFD. Clinical implications include integrating financial therapies into suicide prevention treatments and incorporating RFD into assessments and treatments. To aid research and risk assessment efforts, we propose a new RFD Index, with eight five-point response items.

Suggested Citation

  • Julian Madsen & Keith M Harris, 2021. "Negative self-appraisal: Personal reasons for dying as indicators of suicidality," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0246341
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246341
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0246341
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0246341&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0246341?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Madsen, Julian & Jobson, Laura & Slewa-Younan, Shameran & Li, Haoxiang & King, Kylie, 2024. "Mental health literacy among Arab men living in high-income Western countries: A systematic review and narrative synthesis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 346(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0246341. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.