Comparing Public Attitudes to Traditional Biomedical Versus Trauma-Informed Approaches in Psychosis Services.

Objective: Stigma is a significant barrier to engagement with psychosis services. This study explored whether trauma-informed mental health services are perceived as less stigmatizing and more effective than traditional biomedical services, and examined individual-level predictors of such perceptions. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 1460 participants via Amazon Mechanical Turk. Respondents were randomly assigned to read one of two vignettes describing either a trauma-informed or traditional biomedical psychosis service. Attitudes toward the service were measured using service-related attitudinal questions grounded in the tripartite framework Olson and Zanna ( Results: Trauma-informed services were rated significantly less stigmatizing and more effective across all dimensions ( Conclusions: Trauma-informed services are perceived as less stigmatizing and more effective than traditional biomedical models. Findings highlight the influence of individual attitudes and experiences on stigma, supporting contact-based, context-aware public campaigns to improve perceptions of psychosis and promote compassionate, trauma-informed mental health care.