Public Stigma Toward Female and Male Opium and Heroin Users. An Experimental Test of Attribution Theory and the Familiarity Hypothesis

The Role of Media in Addressing Opioid Use Disorder: Examining Causal Attributions and Emotions as Mediators of Media Influence on Stigma and Policy Support

This study examined the influence of media on stigma and public support for policy interventions that address opioid-related problems. Data from a survey of 997 U.S. adults indicate that media exposure to opioids and relevant topics significantly influenced stigma and support for punitive and public health-oriented policies, even after direct and indirect experiences with opioid misuse were controlled for. However, differences emerged in terms of what led people to endorse each type of policy intervention. When people attributed opioid misuse to individual-oriented causes after media exposure, they were more likely to support punitive policies. When people recognized pharmaceutical-oriented causes, they tended to support public health-related policies.In addition to causal attributions, emotions (fear, anger, and sympathy) served as mediators with different effects on stigma and policy support. Although exposure to opioid-related stories positively influenced all three emotions, media influence was most likely to elicit sympathy, which was negatively associated with social stigma. However, people who felt anger tended to stigmatize individuals with opioid use disorder and not to support either of the policy interventions. The overall findings suggest that communication efforts addressing the opioid situation should find frames that reduce social stigma and encourage support for public health-related policies.

Assessing self-stigma levels and associated factors among substance use disorder patients at two selected psychiatric hospitals in Egypt: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorder is a growing problem worldwide, and the stigma associated with it remains a significant barrier to treatment and recovery. This study aimed to assess the perceived stigma among individuals with substance use disorders and its correlation with their socio-demographic characteristics and clinical history Parameters.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among 552 patients with substance use disorders admitted to the outpatient clinics of Mansoura University Hospital, Addiction Treatment Unit of the Psychiatry Department, and Port Said Mental Hospital, Addiction Department. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire, which included demographic information, clinical history parameters, and the Perceived Stigma of Substance Abuse Scale (PSAS).

RESULTS

The study found that almost half of the participants were aged 29 or younger, married, and had a median stigma score of 20. The vast majority of participants were male, had no previous legal problems, and had a median stigma score of 19. The most common type of substance used was opioids, and more than half of the participants were still using drugs. The highest mean stigma scores were for the items "Most people think less of a person who has been in treatment for substance use" and "Most employers will pass over the application of someone who has been treated for substance use in favor of another applicant." The perceived stigma score was significantly correlated with the severity of use but not with age or duration of use.

CONCLUSION

Our study investigates self-stigma in substance use disorder (SUD), revealing its variance across demographics and clinical groups. We found that self-stigma correlates with use severity and possibly decreases with abstinence. Notably, societal bias contributes significantly to self-stigma, necessitating societal interventions. The impact of self-stigma on patient well-being highlights the need for personalized treatments and stigma reduction strategies.

Stigmatization in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey experiment using attribution theory and the familiarity hypothesis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a global health crisis, leading to stigmatization and discriminatory behaviors against people who have contracted or are suspected of having contracted the virus. Yet the causes of stigmatization in the context of COVID-19 remain only partially understood. Using attribution theory, we examine to what extent attributes of a fictitious person affect the formation of stigmatizing attitudes towards this person, and whether suspected COVID-19 infection (vs. flu) intensifies such attitudes. We also use the familiarity hypothesis to explore whether familiarity with COVID-19 reduces stigma and whether it moderates the effect of a COVID-19 infection on stigmatization.

METHODS

We conducted a multifactorial vignette survey experiment (2⁸-design, i.e., N_Vignettes = 256) in Germany (N_Respondents = 4,059) in which we experimentally varied signals and signaling events (i.e., information that may trigger stigma) concerning a fictitious person in the context of COVID-19. We assessed respondents' cognitive (e.g., blameworthiness) and affective (e.g., anger) responses as well as their discriminatory inclinations (e.g., avoidance) towards the character. Furthermore, we measured different indicators of respondents' familiarity with COVID-19.

RESULTS

Results revealed higher levels of stigma towards people who were diagnosed with COVID-19 versus a regular flu. In addition, stigma was higher towards those who were considered responsible for their infection due to irresponsible behavior. Knowing someone who died from a COVID infection increased stigma. While higher self-reported knowledge about COVID-19 was associated with more stigma, higher factual knowledge was associated with less.

CONCLUSION

Attribution theory and to a lesser extent the familiarity hypothesis can help better understand stigma in the context of COVID-19. This study provides insights about who is at risk of stigmatization and stigmatizing others in this context. It thereby allows identifying the groups that require more support in accessing healthcare services and suggests that basic, factually oriented public health interventions would be promising for reducing stigma.

Effects of media representations of drug related deaths on public stigma and support for harm reduction

BACKGROUND

Drug related deaths (DRD) are at historically high levels in the United Kingdom (UK), but some approaches that have the potential to reduce risk of mortality remain controversial. Public support makes an important contribution to drug policy development but there are high levels of public stigma towards people who use drugs (PWUD), and this is partly shaped by media representations. We investigated whether depiction of the characteristics of decedents represented in news articles about DRD was associated with differences in stigmatising attitudes and support for harm reduction policy.

METHODS

We undertook a cross-sectional online study with a randomised design, conducted with a nationally representative sample (UK). Participants (N = 1280) were randomly presented with one of eight simulated news stories that reported on a DRD that differed with respect to drug (ecstasy or heroin), and the gender (male or female) and age (younger or older) of the decedent. Data were analysed using MANOVA.

RESULTS

Data were obtained for 1248 participants (51.0% female; mean age 45.7±15.4). Stigma was higher towards depictions of male, older, and heroin deaths (all p < .001). Harm reduction support was higher in those participants seeing older compared to younger subjects (p = .035), and the older ecstasy decedent compared to younger decedent (p = .029).

CONCLUSION

Presentation of some types of DRD are associated with higher public stigma towards the decedent than others. Those groups developing agenda-setting activities designed to reduce stigma or foster public support for harm reduction policies should consider the different ways in which audiences may respond to the depiction and framing of DRD in news media.

Initial Validation and Findings From the Willing/Ready Subscale of the Church Addiction Response Scale

Addiction has been a global health crisis over recent decades and worsened substantially during COVID-19 lockdowns. We report on the development, validation, and findings from an instrument developed to assess the readiness of churches in the Appalachian Highlands to address addiction. The Church Addiction Response Scale (CARS) is a 41-item, three section measure assessing "What are your views about addiction?" (14 items), "What are your views about interacting with people who are addicted to drugs?" (11 items), and "What do you think the church's role is in addressing addiction?" (16 items). The CARS was found to be unidimensional with strong internal consistency and initial evidence of construct validity was positive. Most respondents reported willingness to assist people living with addiction, but many reported that they felt underprepared, thus were not ready. Areas of preparation were largely those that could be addressed through training, such as understanding the physiology and psychology of addiction, available treatment options, and how to avoid doing harm. Thus, with adequate training, the likelihood of equipping a church-based workforce to provide support for people living with addiction seems attainable.