<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods
	xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3"
	xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
	version="3.7"
	xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-7.xsd">
	<titleInfo>
		<title>Three agendas for changing the public stigma of mental illness.</title>
	</titleInfo>

	<name>
		<namePart>Corrigan, Patrick</namePart>
		<role>
			<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">Creator</roleTerm>
		</role>

		<description>Faculty</description>
	</name>

	<name>
		<namePart>Al-Khouja, Maya</namePart>
		<role>
			<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">Contributor</roleTerm>
		</role>
	</name>

	<name type="corporate">
		<namePart>PSYC / Psychology</namePart>
		<affiliation>Illinois Institute of Technology</affiliation>
		<role>
			<roleTerm type="text">Affiliated department</roleTerm>
		</role>
	</name>

	<originInfo>
		<dateCreated encoding="w3cdtf" keyDate="yes">2018</dateCreated>

		<dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2017</dateIssued>

		<publisher>American Psychological Association</publisher>
	</originInfo>

	<abstract
		>OBJECTIVE: Antistigma programs may be guided by 3 differing agendas: services (promote treatment engagement),
		rights (help people achieve rightful goals), and self-worth (facilitate self-worth and efficacy). This study
		examined the construct validity of this perspective by examining the factor structure of importance ratings of
		the 3 agendas. The study examined how importance might be viewed differently by the population as a whole versus
		a subsample of people who reported previous experience with mental health services and hence could be directly
		harmed by stigma. METHODS: 373 individuals recruited using Mechanical Turk completed importance ratings for each
		of the 3 agendas. Measures of public stigma were completed to examine concurrent validity of importance ratings.
		Those who reported taking medications for a psychiatric disorder were divided into a separate group and
		completed a measure of self-stigma. RESULTS: Outcomes seemed to confirm the factor structure of the 3 agendas
		model thereby offering partial support for the framework. Group analyses showed the services agenda was viewed
		as more important than rights or self-worth. People with mental health experience viewed the services agenda as
		more important than the other 2. However, dividing the mental health group into low and high self-stigma
		revealed that those with low self-stigma rated the rights agenda as more important. Conclusions and Implication
		for Practice: Participants with lower self-stigma identify the harm brought by stigma and thus endorse rights
		and self-worth more than those with higher self-stigma. Implications of these findings are discussed to assist
		to prioritize agendas for public health campaigns.</abstract
	>

	<note type="version identification">postprint</note>

	<typeOfResource authority="aat" valueURI="http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300048715">Article</typeOfResource>

	<physicalDescription>
		<form />
		<digitalOrigin>born digital</digitalOrigin>
		<internetMediaType>application/pdf</internetMediaType>
	</physicalDescription>

	<language>
		<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">en</languageTerm>
	</language>

	<relatedItem type="otherFormat"><identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/prj0000277</identifier></relatedItem>

	<accessCondition type="useAndReproduction" displayLabel="rightsstatements.org">In Copyright</accessCondition>

	<accessCondition type="useAndReproduction" displayLabel="rightsstatements.orgURI"
		>http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/</accessCondition
	>

	<accessCondition type="restrictionOnAccess">embargoed access</accessCondition>

	<recordInfo>
		<languageOfCataloging>
			<languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">eng</languageTerm>
		</languageOfCataloging>
	</recordInfo>
	<identifier type="hdl">http://hdl.handle.net/10560/islandora:1000498</identifier></mods
>
