School of Psychology, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
School of Psychology, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Clin Psychol Rev. 2019 Aug;72:101749. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2019.101749. Epub 2019 Jun 18.
Mental health stigma is a substantial problem all over the world. Although many interventions to reduce stigma exist, there is considerable methodological variability, making it difficult for decision-makers to determine what strategies are the most effective and what characteristics make them so. To this end, we conducted a meta-analysis on intergroup contact strategies and examined several potential moderators. We searched 5 databases for published and unpublished studies and retrieved 101 studies from 24 countries that could be included in the analyses. Ninety studies assessed outcomes immediately after the intervention (n = 15,826), 33 in the short-term (n = 3,697), and 7 in the medium-term (n = 842). The effect of contact was significant and small-to-medium in size at all three timepoints, d = -0.384, -0.334, and -0.526, respectively. Intervention effectiveness did not differ between contact with or without an educational component, different contact mediums, or the mental illness of the outgroup member. However, the effect of contact was stronger in non-Western countries and in university students and health professionals compared to community members. These results may inform policy-makers of the most effective and suitable stigma-reduction initiatives to invest in and can guide researchers towards important avenues for future research.
心理健康污名化是一个全球性的严重问题。尽管有许多旨在减少污名的干预措施,但它们在方法学上存在很大的差异,这使得决策者难以确定哪些策略最有效,以及是什么特点使它们如此有效。为此,我们对群体间接触策略进行了荟萃分析,并研究了几个潜在的调节变量。我们在 5 个数据库中搜索了已发表和未发表的研究,并从 24 个国家检索到 101 项可纳入分析的研究。其中 90 项研究评估了干预后立即的结果(n=15826),33 项研究评估了短期结果(n=3697),7 项研究评估了中期结果(n=842)。在所有三个时间点,接触的效果都是显著的,且效果大小为小到中等,d 值分别为-0.384、-0.334 和-0.526。有教育内容和没有教育内容的接触、不同的接触媒介、或外群体成员的精神疾病,对干预效果没有影响。然而,与社区成员相比,在非西方国家、在大学生和卫生专业人员中,接触的效果更强。这些结果可以为决策者提供最有效的、适合投资的减少污名的举措,并为研究人员指明未来研究的重要方向。