IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT STIGMATIZING ATTITUDES AND STEREOTYPES ABOUT DEPRESSION

Prior research examining stigma toward depression has relied exclusively upon explicit measures, to the exclusion of implicit measures. Focusing exclusively on explicit stigma may provide an incomplete perspective, be subject to social desirability biases, and underestimate the extent of stigma towards depression. Including implicit measures in depression stigma research may provide valuable information on automatic attitudes and stereotypes, which may be more accurate predictors of automatic behaviors toward depressed persons. The present study examined implicit and explicit attitudes and stereotypes regarding the stability, controllability, and etiology of depression in an undergraduate sample, using physical illness as a comparison condition. Depression was hypothesized to be rated as more negative, temporary, controllable, and psychologically-caused than physical illness on both implicit and explicit measures. Differences were expected to be especially pronounced when measured implicitly. Participants (n = 135) completed a series of implicit association tasks (IATs) and explicit semantic differential scales. Results demonstrated more negative attitudes about depression, compared to physical illness on implicit, but riot explicit, measures. Explicit and implicit views of the etiology of depression were more supportive of psychological causes than biological causes, and this was more pronounced when measured implicitly. Depression was explicitly viewed as more controllable than physical illness; however, this difference was not observed implicitly. Whereas explicit ratings of stability were similar for depression and physical illness, participants implicitly rated depression as less stable than physical illness. The current study highlights the importance of including implicit measures in stigma research.