JCPSLP November 2017

Results Familiarity with mental illness

• Error Choice Test (ECT) – examining understanding of mental illness and stigmatising beliefs (Cooper, Corrigan, & Watson, 2003; Michaels & Corrigan, 2013) • Attribution Questionnaire (AQ-27) (Corrigan, Edwards, et al., 2001) – examining stigmatising beliefs and attitudes towards mental health The Level Of Familiarity Survey (LOF) (Corrigan, Edwards, et al., 2001; Michaels & Corrigan, 2013) is an 11-item survey in which responses are coded for the level of intimacy and familiarly an individual has with mental illness: 11 = indicates the most familiarity, 7 = medium familiarity, 1 = little to no familiarity. Respondents select all statements that reflect their experience and then summed scores are used to generate a single familiarity score. The higher the score, the higher the level of familiarity with mental illness. The Error Choice Test (ECT) (Cooper et al., 2003) is a 14-item survey utilising true/false statements that was developed to assess public stigma towards mental illness without drawing attention to the intent of the measure. This test was designed to obtain a more accurate self-report of stigmatising attitudes by being presented in the guise of a knowledge test. It is not, however, a test of knowledge about mental health. Each answer is given a score of 1 (more biased/stigmatising response) or 0 (less biased/ stigmatising response). Thus, a higher score indicates greater stigmatising beliefs and attitudes (Cooper et al., 2003). The Attribution Questionnaire Short Form (AQ-27) (Corrigan, Edwards, et al., 2001) is a 27-item self-report survey which assesses nine domains of commonly stereotyped responses towards an individual with mental illness: responsibility (“people with mental illness can control their symptoms and are responsible for having the illness”), pity (“people with mental illness are overtaken by their own disorder and therefore deserve concern and pity”), anger (“people with mental illness are blamed for having the illness and provoke wrath and rage”), dangerousness (“people with mental illness are not safe”), fear (“people with mental illness are dangerous”), help (“people with mental illness need assistance”), coercion (“people with mental illness have to participate in treatment management”), segregation (“people with mental illness are sent to institutions located far from the community”), and avoidance (“patients with mental illness do not live in society”). Items are presented on a 9-point Likert scale and subscale scores are calculated by summing the items corresponding to that subscale. A total score may also be calculated. Higher scores represent greater endorsement of the corresponding attitude or belief. Corrigan et al. (2003) have associated some of these constructs with discriminative attitudes (responsibility, dangerousness, fear, anger, coercion, segregation, and avoidance) and others with attitudes of closeness and assistance (help and pity). Data analysis For each measure, scores were averaged within each discipline and then across all three disciplines and these averages compared pre- and post-placement. It is recognised that this method limits the specificity of the results at an individual level, but for this study cohort level change was the focus. Paired t-tests were conducted on the ECT and LOF survey results using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (23.0) to determine the degree of change that occurred between measurement time points. A confidence level of 95% was adopted. Descriptive analysis of AQ27 data was carried out.

When analysed collectively as a single group, the students overall (n = 26) demonstrated a statistically significant increase ( p = 0.03) in their familiarity with mental illness as ascertained by the Level of Familiarity Survey (Michaels & Corrigan, 2013). Despite an upward trend in familiarity scores for all disciplines, only the change for DTn students was statistically significant. The change for SLP students was approaching statistical significance. The mean familiarity scores for each discipline both pre- and post- placement are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Familiarity with mental illness pre- and post-placement

Statistically significant change

Average familiarity score (Post)

Average familiarity score (Pre)

EP ( n = 10)

22.2

27.2

No ( p = .223)

SLP ( n = 10)

18.6

34.9

No ( p = .055)

DTn ( n = 6)

13.3

26.0

Yes ( p = .00)

All disciplines ( n = 26)

16.7

29.8

Yes ( p = .03)

Beliefs and attitudes about mental health Error Choice Test The Error Choice Test measures understanding of and public stigma towards mental illness, in the guise of a knowledge test. There were positive change in scores on this measure across all three disciplines collectively from pre- to post-placement indicating improvement of stigmatising beliefs and attitudes; however, the degree of change did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.83, SD = 2.74). When disciplines were analysed separately, students in the discipline of dietetics demonstrated a positive change in their attitudes overall, whereas students from exercise physiology and speech-language pathology demonstrated a very slight negative change, reflecting a trend towards more stigmatising attitudes. Again, none of these changes reached statistical significance. Findings for each discipline separately and then for all three disciplines collectively are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2. Changes in understanding and public stigma toward mental health pre- and post- placement (Error Choice Test)

Discipline

Average score (Pre)

Average score (Post)

Statistically

EP ( n = 10)

6.8

6.9

No ( p = .90; SD = 2.68) No ( p = .54; SD = 3.0) No ( p = .10; SD = 2.74) No ( p = .83; SD = 2.74)

SLP ( n = 10)

7.7

8.3

DTn ( n = 6)

6.6

5

All disciplines ( n = 26)

7.1

7.0

133

JCPSLP Volume 19, Number 3 2017

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au