Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T22:21:39.799Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attributions of causality, responsibility and blame for positive and negative symptom behaviours in caregivers of persons with schizophrenia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2000

HELENE L. PROVENCHER  and
FRANK D. FINCHAM
HELENE L. PROVENCHER
Affiliation:
Faculty of Nursing, Laval University, Centre de recherche Université Laval-Robert Giffard, Quebec, Canada; and Department of Psychology, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA
FRANK D. FINCHAM
Affiliation:
Faculty of Nursing, Laval University, Centre de recherche Université Laval-Robert Giffard, Quebec, Canada; and Department of Psychology, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background. Causal, responsibility and blame attributions for positive and negative symptom behaviours were examined in 70 caregivers of persons with schizophrenia.

Methods. The majority of subjects belonged to self-help group organizations. The three types of attributions for positive and negative symptom behaviours were assessed by self-report questionnaires.

Results. The extent of patient responsibility did not differ between the two types behaviours. Intentionality and knowledge were equally important in predicting responsibility for positive symptom behaviours, while intent was the most important predictor of responsibility for negative symptom behaviours with the patient capacity playing a significant but minor role. The entailment model was not supported for the two types of behaviours.

Conclusions. Increased attention should be given to responsibility dimensions in assigning moral accountability to the patient. The entailment model should be further explored in problematical caregiving situations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , July 2000 , pp. 899 - 910
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)