Transcript Children’s explanations of different forms of

Felicia Meyer & William Bukowski
Concordia University, Montreal, Canada
4th International Stigma Conference
January 23rd, 2009

Children’s views of mental health and illness have received far
less research attention than:
• the views of adults (Wahl, 2002; Watson, Miller & Lyons, 2005)
• children’s understanding of physical health (e.g. Bibace &
Walsh, 1980)

Peer relationships are an important part of children’s
socialization (Rubin, Bukowski & Parker, 2006; Sullivan, 1953).

Children who have socio-emotional and/or behavioural
problems are more likely to be excluded or rejected
(Deater-Deckard, 2001; Hay et al., 2004).

Less is known about how children develop attitudes towards
peers with such problems (Hennessy, Swords & Heary, 2007).

Purpose
• To integrate research on children’s perceptions of others, understanding
of psychopathology and peer relationships.

Specific aim
• To assess children’s understanding of mental illness so as to learn why
children with problems may be excluded from their peer group.

96 fifth and sixth graders
• 46 girls, 50 boys
• Mean age = 11 years old

Community-based sample
• Four classes in a public elementary school in Montreal, Quebec,
Canada

Children read four vignettes describing hypothetical boys/girls
with different forms of psychopathology
o Depression and conduct disorder
o based on work by Hennessy & Heary (2003)
o ADHD and anxiety
o based on DSM-IV-TR (2004) symptomatology

Order of presentation of vignettes and gender of hypothetical
peer were randomized across participants.
Although Clara usually does ok in school, she
sometimes thinks that she is stupid and no good at
anything. Clara doesn’t smile much and she doesn’t
enjoy things as much as she used to. She spends a lot
of time feeling sad and is rarely happy. She has little
energy and often feels tired during the day.
1) Following each description, participants were asked:
Why do you think Clara is like this?
 A list of reasons explaining why a child would have this
disorder was presented.
 Participants rated each reason according to whether it explained
why the child would have this disorder.
2) Participants were then asked to imagine that the child
described in the vignette was in their class and to rate how
much they would like the hypothetical peer.
Why do you think (hypothetical peer) is like this?

Family experiences (3 items)
…because of how her parents brought her up.

Peer experiences (3 items)
…because he has no friends.

Psychological states (3 items)
…because she thinks other children are better than her.

Physical conditions (2 items)
…because there is something wrong with his brain.

Inability to control (3 items)
…because he can’t control how he feels.

Lack of effort (2 items)
…because she doesn’t try hard enough to:
- relax (anxiety) - be happy (depression) - behave herself (conduct disorder)
- pay attention and to focus (ADHD)
To examine…
1) How children explained the etiology of four forms of
psychopathology.
2) How much children liked each of the four hypothetical peers.
3) Whether liking of the hypothetical peer was associated with
children’s use of reasons to explain psychopathology.

Children used different explanations to describe the etiology of
the four disorders.

Lack of effort was rated as the most likely explanation across
the four disorders.
• more for externalizing disorders (ADHD and conduct disorder) than for
internalizing disorders (anxiety and depression)
Ratings of Reasons for Each Disorder
2.4
2.2
2
Inability to control
Lack of effort
Psychological
Physical
Peer
Family
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
ADHD
ADHD
ANXIETY
Anxiety
DEPRESSION
Depression
CONDUCT DISORDER
Conduct Disorder
Ratings of Lack of Effort for Each Disorder
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
ADHD
ADHD
ANXIETY
DEPRESSION
CONDUCT DISORDER
Anxiety
Depression
Conduct Disorder
Liking Ratings of Hypothetical Peers with Symptoms of
Psychological Disorders
Somewhat
3
2.5
2
A little
1.5
1
Not at all
ADHD
ADHD
ANXIETY
DEPRESSION
CONDUCT DISORDER
Anxiety
Depression
Conduct Disorder
Liking Ratings as a Function of Use of Reasons
2.1
Family
Peer
Psychological
Liking
2
Physical
Lack of effort
Inability to control
1.9
1.8
Low emphasis
High emphasis

Differential use of reasons was found to affect the level of
liking of the hypothetical peer.

Attributing disorder to
o family reasons, psychological reasons or lack of effort was associated
with lower levels of liking.
o reasons related to peer experiences was associated with higher levels of
liking.
1) Children’s beliefs about the causes of psychological problems
• are multidimensional (incorporate individual and environmental factors)
• ascribe particular importance to lack of effort.
2) Children’s liking of their peers depends in part on the
symptoms of psychopathology exhibited by peers.
3) Children’s liking of their peers depends in part on the reasons
they use to explain the peer’s psychological problem.

The findings of this study
• show a link between children’s understanding of psychological
disorders and their affective response to a hypothetical peer with a
disorder.
• have implications for how children perceive and respond to actual
peers with psychological difficulties.

Recent work points to the importance of children’s beliefs
about peers’ personal responsibility for psychological problems
(e.g., Corrigan et al., 2005; Hennessy, Swords & Heary, 2007).

Future research should examine the possible peer rejection and
stigma experienced by children with such problems.

Further analyses will examine
• hypothetical helping
• children’s liking of hypothetical peers versus actual peers with
symptoms of psychopathology

This work can contribute to the development of prevention and
intervention programs targeting children’s understanding and
possible stigmatization of mental illness.

Participants, parents and elementary school staff

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
(SSHRC)

Fonds de recherche sur la société et la culture (FQRSC)

Concordia University Research Chair to W. M. Bukowski

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust Charitable
Funds
Thank you!
Questions? Comments?
For more information: [email protected]