Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

In the ongoing national debate about the role of serious mental illness (SMI) in mass shootings, a major controversy among mental health advocates is whether drawing public attention to an apparent link between SMI and violence, shown to elevate stigma, is the optimal strategy for increasing public support for investing in mental health services or whether non-stigmatizing messages can be equally effective. We conducted a randomized experiment to examine this question. Participants in a nationally representative online panel (N=1,326) were randomized to read one of three brief narratives about SMI emphasizing violence, systemic barriers to treatment, or successful treatment and recovery or to a control arm. Narratives, or stories about individuals, are a common communication strategy used by policymakers, advocates, and the news media. Study results showed that narratives emphasizing violence and barriers to treatment were equally effective in increasing the public’s willingness to pay additional taxes to improve the mental health system (55% and 52% versus 42% in the control arm). Only the narrative emphasizing the link between SMI and violence increased stigma. For the mental health advocates dedicated to improving the public mental health system, findings offer an alternative to stigmatizing messages linking mental illness and violence.