IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socpsy/v52y2006i6p535-551.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert and Lay Explanations of Suicidal Behaviour: Comparison of the General Population’s, Suicide Attempters’, General Practitioners’ and Psychiatrists’ Views

Author

Listed:
  • Tina Zadravec

    (University Psychiatric Hospital Ljubljana, Slovenia, tina.zadravec@guest.arnes.si)

  • Onja Grad

    (University Psychiatric Hospital Ljubljana, Slovenia)

  • Gregor SoÄ an

    (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia)

Abstract

Background : Different explanations of suicidal behaviour coexist today. The incompatibility of the beliefs among experts and (potential) users of medical services can influence the implementation of prevention programmes, help-seeking behaviour and adherence to treatment. Aims : The aims of the study were to identify explanatory models of suicidal behaviour and to determine possible incompatibilities between lay (the general population and suicide attempters) and expert (the general practitioners and psychiatrists) views. Methods : The Questionnaire on Attitudes towards Suicide was revised on the basis of semi-structured interviews with the general population, suicide attempters, general practitioners and psychiatrists. The revised version was then applied to each of these four groups. Results : Five explanatory models were identified: namely, personality, sociological, medical, crisis and genetic models. Significant group differences on the explanatory models were found. The lay people favoured crisis, sociological and medical models whereas the experts shared the belief in the medical, genetic and crisis models. Conclusions : The crisis model gained considerable support and was generally accepted as correct. This could be the common ground between lay people and experts and the starting point of both treatment and prevention programmes.

Suggested Citation

  • Tina Zadravec & Onja Grad & Gregor SoÄ an, 2006. "Expert and Lay Explanations of Suicidal Behaviour: Comparison of the General Population’s, Suicide Attempters’, General Practitioners’ and Psychiatrists’ Views," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 52(6), pages 535-551, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:52:y:2006:i:6:p:535-551
    DOI: 10.1177/00207640060668408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00207640060668408
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00207640060668408?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
    ---><---

    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:sae:socpsy:v:52:y:2006:i:6:p:535-551. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.