Location of Repository

Accounting for psychological problems: How user-friendly is formulation?

By Dawn Leeming, Mary Boyle and James MacDonald

Abstract

Formulation, with its use of psychosocial explanations for psychological problems, has the potential to normalise and destigmatise clients’ difficulties. However, we present findings from a recent study which suggest that for mental health service users, using psychosocial explanations is not a straightforward process

Topics: BF
Publisher: The British Psychological Society
Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.hud.ac.uk:8897

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (2003). A different kind of chemistry? Reformulating ‘formulation’.
  2. (1995). A search for meaning: Making sense of depression. doi
  3. (2001). Abandoning diagnosis and (cautiously) adopting formulation. Paper delivered at symposium on Recent advances in psychological understanding of psychotic experiences.
  4. (2006). Controversies and debates about formulation. In
  5. (1999). Do families cause ‘schizophrenia’? Revisiting a taboo subject. In
  6. (1996). How to survive without psychotherapy.
  7. (1997). Introducing material-discursive approaches to health and illness. In
  8. (2008). Managing shame: A contextual analysis. Unpublished PhD thesis,
  9. (2003). Meanings of madness: A literature review. doi
  10. (2006). Prejudice and schizophrenia: A review of the ‘mental illness is an illness like any other’ approach. doi
  11. (1993). Return to Sender: Reintegrative stigma-management strategies of ex-psychiatric patients. doi
  12. (1998). Shame and humiliation in the treatment of complex cases. In
  13. (2005). Stigmatisation of people with mental illnesses. doi
  14. (2001). The role of biological and genetic causal beliefs in the stigmatisation of ‘mental patients’. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.