Explanatory models for mental illness endorsed by Christian clergymen: The development and use of an instrument in Singapore
Researchers have attempted to elicit the explanatory models used by different populations to understand mental illness, since these models can influence how populations use mental-health treatment. However, little effort has been made to understand the explanatory models used by Christian clergymen....
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis
2008
|
| In: |
Mental health, religion & culture
Year: 2008, Volume: 11, Issue: 3, Pages: 287-300 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Researchers have attempted to elicit the explanatory models used by different populations to understand mental illness, since these models can influence how populations use mental-health treatment. However, little effort has been made to understand the explanatory models used by Christian clergymen. This is despite their important role as providers of mental-health care in many Asian and Western societies. Neither are there suitable instruments to conduct such investigations. This study attempts to present a suitable instrument for such research and explore the belief structure of this population by administering a modified version of the Opinions about Psychological Problems to a representative sample of Singaporean Christian clergymen. Factor-analytic techniques revealed five factors which were explained as (1) a Traditional Christian and (2) a Deliverance etiology, both models implicating religious causes for mental illness, (3) a Poor Coping and (4) Internal Conflicts etiology, essentially being psychological explanations and an (5) Organic etiology model. The Traditional Christian model received the greatest endorsement, followed by the Poor Coping model, while the Organic model had the least acceptance. The belief structure used by nearly half of the respondents was noted to be complex, involving a combination of religious, psychological, and organic explanations. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-9737 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Mental health, religion & culture
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/13674670701255695 |