ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Label matters: how labeling and diagnosis affect lay perception of people with depressive symptoms.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated how the label "depression" and information about a medical diagnosis influence perceptions of individuals with depressive symptoms as legitimately experiencing depression and a medical condition. In three experiments, participants read a description of a person meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria for major depressive episode and manipulated whether the label "depression" and the information about a professional medical diagnosis were included. Participants were more likely to perceive the person as having depression when both the label and diagnosis were present. However, paradoxically, when a diagnosis explicitly included the word "depression", participants were less likely to view the symptoms as indicating a legitimate medical condition than when the diagnosis omitted the term. These effects were not moderated by participants' own experience of depression. Gender effects emerged in Experiment 3: results replicated for male protagonists but differed for female protagonists, where label effects were independent of medical diagnosis information. Finally, a meta-analysis across the three experiments supported our hypothesis that the label "depression" weakened the effect of the medical diagnosis. Moreover, participants attributed a higher degree of legitimacy to a medical condition when the diagnosis was provided by a doctor, but only when this diagnosis did not include the label "depression".
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.