This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mathews, M. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mathews, M. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Assessment and comparison of culturally based explanations for mental disorder among Singaporean Chinese youth

Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore, Singapore

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: socmathe{at}nus.edu.sg.

	Abstract

Background: Culture is important to how populations understand the cause of mental disorder, a variable that has implications for treatment-seeking behaviour. Asian populations underutilize professional mental health treatment partly because of their endorsement of supernatural causation models to explain mental disorders, beliefs that stem from their religious backgrounds.

Aims: This study sought to understand the dimensions of explanatory models used by three groups of Singaporean Chinese youth (n = 842) – Christian, Chinese religionist, no religion – and examined their responses to an instrument that combined explanations from psychological and organic perspectives on mental disorder with approaches from Asian and Western religious traditions.

Results: Factor analysis revealed five factors. Two were psychological cor-responding to the humanistic and cognitive-behavioural perspectives respectively. Another two, which were supernatural in nature, dealt with karmaic beliefs popular among Asian religionists and more classical religious explanations common in monotheistic religions. The remaining factor was deemed a physiological model although it incorporated an item that made it consistent with an Asian organic model.

Conclusion: While groups differed in their endorsement of supernatural explan-ations, psychological perspectives had the strongest endorsement among this population. Regression analysis showed that individuals who endorsed supernatural explanations more strongly tended to have no exposure to psychology courses and heightened religiosity.

First published on September 17, 2009
International Journal of Social Psychiatry 2009, doi:10.1177/0020764008096853


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?