ArticleThe International journal of social psychiatry2026
Professional Perspectives on Mental Distress: Exploring Attributional Differences and Their Association With Stigmatizing Attitudes Among Psychiatrists, Psychologists, and Social Workers.
Article in The International journal of social psychiatry, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMental health professionals often differ in their explanatory models of mental distress, which may influence their attitudes toward individuals experiencing such conditions. Stigmatizing attitudes among providers can adversely affect therapeutic relationships, service quality, and recovery outcomes.
aimsThis study investigates the attributional frameworks-biological, cognitive-behavioral, psychodynamic, and social-realist-endorsed by psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers in Swedish adult psychiatry. It further examines how these explanatory preferences are associated with stigmatizing attitudes toward individuals with mental distress.
methodA cross-sectional survey was conducted with 715 licensed psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers. Attributional orientations were measured using a revised version of the Maudsley Attitude Questionnaire (MAQ-R), and stigma was assessed with the revised Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC-R). Group differences were analyzed using General Linear Models, and associations between attributional frameworks and stigma were explored through linear regression. Given the cross-sectional design, causal inferences cannot be drawn from the observed associations.
resultsPsychiatrists reported significantly stronger endorsement of biological attributions compared to psychologists and social workers, while psychologists favored cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic explanations. Social workers exhibited the strongest preference for social-realist attributions. Endorsement of biological and cognitive-behavioral models was positively associated with higher stigma scores, although these associations may reflect broader occupational or systemic influences. In contrast, social-realist attributions were associated with lower stigma. Psychodynamic attributions showed no significant association.
conclusionsDifferences in attributional frameworks among mental health professionals are associated with variation in reported stigmatizing attitudes. These findings underscore the importance of addressing explanatory diversity in interdisciplinary training and suggest that nuanced understandings of etiology may inform stigma-reduction efforts. Future research should explore the role of contextual and institutional factors, as well as potential confounders, in shaping these relationships.
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.