Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Background: Research has repeatedly shown that individuals with severe mental illness desire interpersonal and romantic relationships and that social support (including spousal relationships) is beneficial. In addition, social deficits in mental disorders can often get in the way of developing fulfilling relationships. However, there is little currently available to help clinicians and researchers assess romantic relationship functioning in those with mental illness. The aim of this pilot study was to examine reliability and validity of a new measure of functioning in romantic relationships, the Romantic Relationship Functioning Scale (RRFS). Method: The RRFS was constructed based on theory proposed by Redmond, Larkin, and Harrop (2010). In an analog study, we tested the measure in a sample of college students (N=387), examining reliability, stability over time, factor structure, and relationships with measures of psychopathology and related measures of social functioning to assess convergent validity. Results: The RRFS exhibited a hierarchical four-factor structure, supporting the use of a total score. Although subscales were supported in the factor analysis, other psychometric evidence was weaker, and the use of a total score is advocated. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were acceptable for the total scale (>.8). The RRFS had moderate to large correlations in the expected direction with all psychopathology measures. In predictive models, overall mental health, social functioning, and fewer interpersonal difficulties predicted higher romantic relationship functioning. Conclusions: The RRFS total score shows preliminary evidence of reliability and validity. The RRFS has potential to be of use in treatment centers for undergraduates and for individuals with diagnosed mental disorders. Future research should further investigate the RRFS subscales and the measure’s performance in clinical samples.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Stigma is a barrier to recovery for people with mental illness. Problematically, stigma also has been documented among mental health practitioners. To date, however, most research has focused on explicit attitudes regarding mental illness. Little research has examined implicit attitudes, which has the potential to reveal evaluations residing outside of conscious control or awareness. Moreover, research has tended to use a mixed sample of practitioners and programs. The extent to which both explicit and implicit stigma is endorsed by mental health practitioners utilizing evidence-based practices is unknown. The purposes of the current study were to 1) carefully examine implicit and explicit stigmatizing attitudes, or biases, among Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) staff and 2) explore the extent to which explicit and implicit biases predicted the use of treatment control mechanisms. Participants were 154 ACT staff from nine states. They completed implicit (Implicit Association Test) and explicit measures of stigma. Overall, participants exhibited positive explicit and implicit attitudes towards people with mental illness. When modeled using latent factors, implicit, but not explicit bias significantly predicted the endorsement of restrictive or controlling clinical interventions. Practitioners who perceived individuals with mental illness as relatively more dangerous and helpless (both explicit and implicit), as well as participants from Indiana and those with less education were more likely to endorse use of control mechanisms. Thus, despite overall positive attitudes toward those with mental illness for the sample as a whole, even low levels of stigma at the individual level were found to affect clinical care. Mental health professionals, and specifically ACT clinicians, should work to be aware of ways in which their biases influence how they intervene with consumers.