Farhall John, Pepping Christopher A, Cai Ru Ying, Cugnetto Marilyn L, Miller Scott D
Department of Psychology and Counselling, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia.
Academic Psychology Unit, NorthWestern Mental Health, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Epping, Australia.
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2022 Mar;49(2):326-342. doi: 10.1007/s10488-021-01166-y. Epub 2021 Oct 6.
Conventional mental health treatments do not meet the needs of all who seek help: some consult informal and alternative providers. Researching the use and perceived benefits of these non-conventional sources of help may contribute to understanding help-seeking behavior and inform mental health policy. We explored the experiences of people consulting psychics (a type of alternative provider) for mental health needs, through comparisons with experiences of people consulting conventional and informal providers. An online survey sought feedback on help seeking for stress or emotional problems from 734 adults who had consulted a psychologist or counsellor; doctor or psychiatrist who prescribed medication; friend or family member; or psychic or similar alternative provider. Analyses included descriptive and inferential statistics and content analysis of textual responses. Problems were commonly described in symptom or disorder terminology with considerable overlap across groups. Content analysis of reasons for choice of helper identified four main categories-functional, reasoned, emotional, and passive-which differed significantly across groups (Cramer's V = 0.26), with consulting psychics predominantly a reasoned choice. Ratings of overall effectiveness of help by those consulting psychics were greater than for the three other groups (d = 0.31 to 0.42), with very few adverse outcomes in any group. Help seeking for stress or emotional problems includes consultations with psychics or similar alternative providers, with self-reported outcomes better than for conventional providers. Further research is warranted to establish whether psychic consultations may serve a useful public health function.
一些人会咨询非正规和替代疗法的提供者。研究这些非传统帮助来源的使用情况和感知到的益处,可能有助于理解求助行为,并为心理健康政策提供参考。我们通过与咨询传统和非正规提供者的人的经历进行比较,探讨了咨询灵媒(一种替代疗法提供者)以满足心理健康需求的人的经历。一项在线调查征求了734名成年人对于寻求压力或情绪问题帮助的反馈,这些成年人曾咨询过心理学家或顾问、开药方的医生或精神科医生、朋友或家庭成员,或灵媒或类似的替代疗法提供者。分析包括描述性和推断性统计以及对文本回复的内容分析。问题通常用症状或疾病术语来描述,各群体之间有相当大的重叠。对选择帮助者原因的内容分析确定了四个主要类别——功能性、理性、情感性和被动性——这些类别在各群体之间有显著差异(克莱默V系数=0.26),咨询灵媒主要是一种理性选择。咨询灵媒的人对帮助总体效果的评分高于其他三个群体(效应量d=0.31至0.42),任何群体中出现不良后果的情况都很少。寻求压力或情绪问题的帮助包括咨询灵媒或类似的替代疗法提供者,自我报告的结果比传统提供者更好。有必要进行进一步研究,以确定咨询灵媒是否可能发挥有益的公共卫生功能。