The images of psychiatry scale: development, factor structure, and reliability.

BACKGROUND: This analysis is based on a survey questionnaire designed to describe medical educators' views of psychiatry and psychiatrists. Our goals in this paper were to assess the psychometric properties of the survey questions by (a) using exploratory factor analysis to identify the basic factor structure underlying 37 survey items; (b) testing the resulting factor structure using confirmatory factor analysis; and (c) assessing the internal reliability of each identified factor. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to use these techniques to psychometrically assess a scale measuring the strength of stigma that medical educators attached to psychiatry. METHODS: Survey data were collected from a random sample of 1,059 teaching faculty in 23 academic teaching sites in 15 countries. We conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to identify the scale structure and Cronbach's alpha to assess internal consistency of the resulting scales. RESULTS: Results showed that a two-factor solution was the best fit for the data. Following exploratory factor analysis, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis on a split half of the sample. Results highlighted several items with low loadings. Excluding factors with low correlations and allowing for several correlated variances resulted in a good fitting model explaining 95% of the variance in the data. CONCLUSIONS: We identified two unidimensional scales. The Images Scale contained 11 items measuring stereotypic content concerning psychiatry and psychiatrists. The Efficacy of Psychiatry Scale contained 5 items addressing perceptions of the challenges and effectiveness of psychiatry as a discipline.

Stigma in Canada: results from a rapid response survey.

OBJECTIVE: Our paper presents findings from the first population survey of stigma in Canada using a new measure of stigma. Empirical objectives are to provide a descriptive profile of Canadian's expectations that people will devalue and discriminate against someone with depression, and to explore the relation between experiences of being stigmatized in the year prior to the survey among people having been treated for a mental illness with a selected number of sociodemographic and mental health-related variables. METHOD: Data were collected by Statistics Canada using a rapid response format on a representative sample of Canadians (n = 10 389) during May and June of 2010. Public expectations of stigma and personal experiences of stigma in the subgroup receiving treatment for a mental illness were measured. RESULTS: Over one-half of the sample endorsed 1 or more of the devaluation discrimination items, indicating that they believed Canadians would stigmatize someone with depression. The item most frequently endorsed concerned employers not considering an application from someone who has had depression. Over one-third of people who had received treatment in the year prior to the survey reported discrimination in 1 or more life domains. Experiences of discrimination were strongly associated with perceptions that Canadians would devalue someone with depression, younger age (12 to 15 years), and self-reported poor general mental health. CONCLUSIONS: The Mental Health Experiences Module reflects an important partnership between 2 national organizations that will help Canada fulfill its monitoring obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and provide a legacy to researchers and policy-makers who are interested in monitoring changes in stigma over time.