Year of Award

2025

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Type

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Degree Name

Clinical Psychology

Department or School/College

Department of Psychology

Committee Chair

Duncan G. Campbell

Commitee Members

Bryan N. Cochran, Jayna Mumbauer-Pisano, Holly Schleicher, Rachel Williamson

Keywords

label avoidance, measure development, mental health, mental health treatment, stigma

Abstract

Stigma is a commonly reported barrier to receiving treatment for mental health concerns. One aspect of stigma, label avoidance, specifically addresses the stigma involved when individuals deny their status as having a mental illness and avoid institutions that may mark them as someone with a mental illness. Despite the importance of label avoidance for understanding treatment seeking, there does not currently exist a psychometrically sound measure of label avoidance. In order to address this gap, the present study used a revised and shortened form of a preliminary measure of label avoidance, the LAM-16, to collect psychometric data over two time points in a sample of college students (Time 1: n = 269; Time 2: n = 116). Exploratory components factor analysis indicated a one-factor solution of the LAM-16, made up of 16 items, that was found to have strong internal consistency and test re-test reliability (α = .84; r = .81, p< .01). Additionally, preliminary convergent and discriminant validity evidence was gathered, comparing the LAM-16 to existing measures. The LAM-16 was significantly correlated with measures of help seeking (r = -.57, p< .01), anticipated stigma (r = .37, p< .001), and self-stigma (r = -.14, p = .027). As expected, the relationship between the LAM-16 and a dissimilar construct of social desirability was not significant. The LAM-16 accrued criterion and predictive validity by demonstrating significant relationships with engagement in mental health treatment. Notably, in prospective analyses the LAM-16 significantly predicted self-reported help seeking intentions, over and above other existing stigma measures (R2 = .28, F(4,110) = 10.681, p < .001; β = -.53, p < .001). Additionally, when in a model with other stigma measures, only the LAM-16 and a measure of symptom distress significantly predicted active engagement in treatment prospectively (χ2(5) = 37.26, p < .001; β = .18, p =.008; β = -.19, p < .001). Taken together, this evidence demonstrates that the LAM-16 may have use as a tool to identify individuals who may benefit from treatment for a mental health problem but are reluctant to engage in care for fear of being part of a stigmatized group.

Download

Share

COinS
 

© Copyright 2025 Julia Johanna Cameron