IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v8y2016i3p203-213.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Voices’ use of gender, race and other social categories to undermine female voice-hearers: Implications for incorporating intersectionality within CBT for psychosis

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Haarmans
  • Victoria Vass
  • Richard P. Bentall

Abstract

Great strides have been made in understanding the impact of social inequality on the risk of developing psychotic experiences. However, little is known about the influence of intersecting social categories such as gender, race and class on the experience and expression of psychotic phenomena. Intersectionality, a framework recently advanced in psychology, examines the joint impact of multiple forms of marginalisation on well-being. We adopted this approach to develop a codebook and analyse the voice content of 44 women diagnosed with schizophrenia for the ways in which social categories are used to undermine and/or affirm voice-hearers. Over half of the sample included women with ethnic-minority status. The coding system was reliable. Gendered conditions of worth were used by voices to undermine by far the majority (40) of women and racialised conditions of worth over half (14) the ethnic-minority women. We conclude that voice content often reflects social categories and structural inequalities in society and discuss implications for CBT for psychosis when working with women of majority and ethnic-minority statuses.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Haarmans & Victoria Vass & Richard P. Bentall, 2016. "Voices’ use of gender, race and other social categories to undermine female voice-hearers: Implications for incorporating intersectionality within CBT for psychosis," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 203-213, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:203-213
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2015.1131323
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2015.1131323
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2015.1131323?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:203-213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.