Using counterframing strategies to enhance anti-stigma campaigns related to mental illness

Rationale and methods: Despite the prevalence of media-based anti-stigma campaigns, there is little empirical evidence of their effectiveness and little guidance regarding which communicative strategies can bolster their message. Using a Belgian sample (N = 737) recruited in March-April 2019, the current experimental study manipulated a campaign message using counterframing strategies. Hierarchical linear regression analyses were used to investigate the effectiveness of the resulting nine variants. Results: Campaign effectiveness was most increased by stating that people with a mental illness are "not free-riders or poseurs", or by redefining them as "go-getters" who are "certainly not abnormal or crazy". These variants decreased desired social distance, and significantly reduced stereotype endorsement for people with a high need for cognitive closure. Whereas several campaigns decreased attitudinal stigma for people with a high need for cognitive closure, they inadvertently increased it for people with a low need for cognitive closure. Conclusion: This study indicates that small changes in the body copy can impact a campaign's destigmatizing potential. As such, empirical testing is essential to avoid ineffective or counter-productive anti-stigma interventions. Moreover, this study demonstrates that refuting stigmatizing statements can be a valid strategy in anti-stigma interventions, even though previous literature has argued against it.