↓ Skip to main content

Effects of a Documentary Film on Public Stigma Related to Mental Illness Among Genetic Counselors

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Genetic Counseling, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
Effects of a Documentary Film on Public Stigma Related to Mental Illness Among Genetic Counselors
Published in
Journal of Genetic Counseling, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10897-011-9414-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly Anderson, Jehannine C. Austin

Abstract

Many people, including genetic counselors, have been found to hold stigmatizing attitudes towards people with mental illnesses. We aimed to determine whether these attitudes could be changed by exposing genetic counselors and genetic counseling students to a documentary film about people with mental illness. We screened the documentary at the 2010 North American conferences for genetic counselors. Immediately before (T1), immediately after (T2), and one month after (T3) watching the documentary, participants self-rated their comfort with asking patients about mental illness, and they completed scales measuring two aspects of stigma: stereotype endorsement, and desire for social distance. A total of 87 T1 and T2 questionnaires, and 39 T3 questionnaires were returned. At T2 and T3, 34.5% and 48.7% respectively reported feeling more comfortable to ask patients about mental illness. Scores on the social distance and stereotype endorsement scales decreased significantly from T1 to T2, but returned to initial levels at T3. The findings suggest the documentary increased genetic counselors' and genetic counseling students' comfort with asking about mental illness and temporarily decreased their stigmatizing attitudes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Singapore 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 38%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 21%
Social Sciences 8 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 7 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,384,039
of 11,878,573 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#329
of 629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,786
of 138,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#9
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,878,573 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 629 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 138,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.