1

PREJUDICE TOWARDS PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS: MODULE

DEVELOPMENT FOR PSYCHOEDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

Ma. Daniella Camille E. Danas

Antonio C. Trespeses II

An undergraduate thesis manuscript submitted to the faculty of the Department of

Social Sciences and Humanities, Cavite State University-Imus Campus, Imus City,
Cavite in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science
in Psychology with Contribution No. ____. Prepared under the supervision of Ms.
Maria Angela L. Diopol.

INTRODUCTION

Mental health is the foundation for one’s feeling, thinking, education and self-

esteem. Mental health is also important for friendships, emotional, personal well-

being, and for family or culture. It is because of sound mental well-being that people

are able to execute their duties well and to respond to the daily challenges of their

daily lives. With this, it is also important to note that mental health is much related to

physical health and that if not properly cared for and subjected to several variables

that have negative effects in it; it may be impaired and vulnerable to the development

of such mental illness.

Mental illness applies generally to all diagnosable mental illnesses and health

conditions which involve significant shifts in thought, feeling and/or behavior and

depression or difficulties in the regulation of personal, occupational or family

activities. Mental illness does not discriminate; it can influence anybody regardless of

their age, class, location, employment, social status, ethnicity, faith, sexual

orientation, history or other cultural identity (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

In the Philippines, based on the DOH website, which was last updated in

2018, at least 19 million Filipinos have schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and
 2

are considered bipolar. The largest group, accounting for 17 million, is comprised of

those who suffer from major depressive disorder. In addition, the DOH's Disease

Prevention And Control Bureau-Essential Non-Communicable Disease Division

claimed 5% of Filipinos over the age of 65 had dementia. Further, the DOH unit

noted that studies by the World Health Organization (WHO) showed that 16% of

students between the ages of 13 and 15 have seriously considered attempting

suicide, while 13% have actually attempted suicide one or more times over the past

year. A study conducted among government employees in Metro Manila also

revealed that 32% of the 327 respondents experienced a mental health problem

throughout their lives (Medenilia, Ordinario & Manawis, 2019).

Living within a culture that emphasizes resilience and humor amidst pain and

personal suffering makes it all the more difficult to talk about mental illness out in the

open. The stigma surrounding mental illness further contributes to the difficulty for

people suffering from different conditions for mental health (Tugade, 2017). And

although there have already been several reports of mental illness in the Philippines,

there is still a lack of Filipinos' awareness and knowledge of the definition of mental

health and mental disorder which adds to their stigma against people with mental

illness. Prejudice is the basic and usually negative attitude towards a group's

members. With this preconception, people tend to have negative feelings,

stereotyping attitudes, and a propensity to discriminate toward members of the

group. It also includes prejudices towards members of a group that are usually

negative (Cherry, 2019).

The challenge to have a mental illness that disturbs one's existence on a day-

to-day basis is already a very challenging experience, but with the involvement of

stigma and the opinions of those around them, it becomes even more complicated

because, instead of contemplating one's own emotional well-being, they also have to

deal with other people and their perceptions that can contribute to depression. In

addition, according to Gulliver, Griffiths & Christensen (2012), although mental illness
 3

incidence rates are high, there is a low tendency to seek professional assistance.

Barriers, such as prejudice and stigma, can lead to lower psychological support-

seeking attitudes and untreated mental illness because people thought it would be a

sign of weakness if they sought help, and others would perceive it negatively.

On the workplace setting, both efficiency demands, timelines, quality reviews,

and an influx of information from various outlets not only add to pressure, but can

also take a toll on one's mental health. The subject of mental health remains

controversial, given this fact. Some employees fear that talking about any mental

health condition will result in discrimination or, worse, the loss of their jobs (Samson,

2018). Furthermore, many employers are still hesitating to hire people who admit

mental health problems. This is due to widespread misconceptions, such as the

belief that people with these conditions will not perform well or even interfere with the

workplace (Gutierrez, 2018). While for the academic setting, college students spend

most of their time in classrooms and often communicate with parents, friends and

educators. Their ability to integrate emotionally with the academic institutions

influences the state of their mental health (Cleofas, 2018). For this reason, with or

without the presence of prejudice towards people with mental illness within the

schools and universities, it is a very important factor for them to have programs and

policies that can educate and raise the awareness of each students, teachers and

staffs regarding mental health and mental illness in order to build an environment that

feels open for everyone to voice out their mental health and their mental health

struggles to avoid feelings of isolation and fear of seeking of professional help.

On the positive note, the Philippines has now taken its first steps in raising the

awareness of Filipinos regarding mental health with its passing of the Philippine

Mental Health Law. The law aims to provide affordable and accessible mental health

services and remove the stigma surrounding the people with mental illness by

making mental health care accessible down to the barangays and promotion on

mental health education in schools and workplace. In line with its goal to promote
 4

mental health and remove the stigma, this law also requires educational institutions

to develop their own policies and programs designed to raise awareness on mental

health for the students and employees.

The main objective of this study is to know the levels of prejudice towards

people with mental illness of the respondents and to develop modules for

psychoeducational program that can help in raising awareness on mental health and

removing the stigma and prejudice that surrounds the concept of mental health and

mental illness. By understanding the underlying factors that causes the prejudice of

people towards people with mental illness and with the help of the modules to be

created from this study, Cavite State University-Imus Campus will be able to have its

own program that the Guidance and Counseling office can implement which can help

educate students and employees on how to interact, communicate and socialize with

people with mental illness.

Finally, discussions should begin within families and other social circles,

where assistance is available. And while law so medical care can be partners in

treatment and rehabilitation, freedom from the shadow of prejudice and

discrimination will start in the fundamental units of society (Tugade, 2017).

Statement of the Problem

This research aims to determine the level of prejudice towards people with

mental illness among the students and employees of Cavite State University-Imus

Campus, A.Y. 2019-2020. Specifically, this study aimed to answer the following

specific questions:

1. What is the mean scores of prejudice towards people with mental illness of the

students in terms of:

1.1 Fear;

1.2 Malevolence;

1.3 Authoritarianism; and

1.4 Unpredictability?
 5

2. What is the mean scores of prejudice towards people with mental illness of the

employees in terms of:

2.1 Fear;

2.2 Malevolence;

2.3 Authoritarianism; and

2.4 Unpredictability?

3. Is there a significant difference between the students’ and employees’ mean

scores of prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms of:

3.1 Fear;

3.2 Malevolence;

3.3 Authoritarianism; and

3.4 Unpredictability?

4. Based from the results, what are the proposed drafts of modules for

Psychoeducational Program?

Objectives of the Study

This research aims to know the level of prejudice towards people with mental

illness among the students and employees of Cavite State University-Imus Campus,

A.Y. 2019-2020. In general, this study focused on the following objectives:

1. To know the mean scores of prejudice towards people with mental illness of the

students in terms of:

1.1 Fear;

1.2 Malevolence;

1.3 Authoritarianism; and

1.4 Unpredictability.

2. To know the mean scores of prejudice towards people with mental illness of the

employees in terms of:

2.1 Fear;

2.2 Malevolence;
 6

2.3 Authoritarianism; and

2.4 Unpredictability.

3. To discover if there is a significant difference between the students’ and

employees’ mean scores of prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms

of:

3.1 Fear;

3.2 Malevolence;

3.3 Authoritarianism; and

3.4 Unpredictability.

4. To come up with the proposed drafts of modules for Psychoeducational Program

based from the results of the survey.

Hypothesis

In line with the problems and data presented, the researchers came up with

these hypotheses:

1. There is no significant difference in the mean scores of the respondents in

their prejudice towards people with mental illness when the respondents are

grouped according to classification in terms of:

1.1 Malevolence;

1.2 Unpredictability.

2. There is a significant difference in the mean scores of the respondents in their

prejudice towards people with mental illness when the respondents are

grouped according to classification in terms of:

2.1 Fear;

2.2 Authoritarianism

Significance of the Study

This research study was designed to determine the level of prejudice towards

people with mental illness among the students and employees of Cavite State
 7

University-Imus Campus, A.Y. 2019-2020. The data that gathered from this study

may be beneficial to the following:

Community. This study can help the community to be more open on the

concept of mental health making every person experiencing mental illness

comfortable, free to express themselves and open on seeking help without the

feeling of being judged.

This University. This study will enable this university to develop and

establish comprehensive and efficient mental health program in response to the

mandate of the Civil Service Commission for government institution and public

sectors to develop their own mental health program. The modules from this study will

allow this university to have an available program for the institution to raise

awareness and to reduce or eliminate the prejudice of the students and employees

towards people with mental illness by which the Guidance and Counseling Office can

implement the following activities that will be produced from the modules to its

students and employees for the following years.

Employers. This study could help the human resource department of this

university in becoming aware of the presence of prejudice towards people with

mental illness within their workplace and in having a basis which they can use for

developing policies which they can implement to help removing the presence of

prejudice in the workplace.

Family. This study could aid in making one's family well equipped with

knowledge and having a strong foundation regarding mental health by having at least

one member in the family who has a well established understanding of the concept of

mental health which can then hinder the formation of prejudice.

Teachers. This study will help them to be more aware on the concept of

mental health as being employees of this university, they will also be exposed to the

different activities and information that will be produced from the modules of the
 8

study, which can then help them on how they should handle their students with

mental illness in a sense that prejudice will not occur.

Employees. This study will improve their awareness regarding mental health

and educate them on how to interact, communicate and socialize with people with

mental illness as the human resource department of this university can use the

results of the study as their basis for the development of rules and regulations with

regards to reducing and eliminating prejudice towards people with mental illness and

since they will also be participating in the different activities in the modules if the

study.

Students. This study will help the students gain more knowledge regarding

mental health and the underlying factors that causes prejudice by having the

Guidance and Counseling Office implement the activities in the modules and

involving the students in the said activities through which they will be exposed on

knowledge regarding mental health, mental illness and some ways in reducing or

eliminating prejudice towards people with mental illness.

Future Researchers. The modules that will be developed from this study

could serve as the tools of future researchers when they create a larger study

regarding prejudice towards people with mental illness.

Time and Place of the Study

The study was conducted at Cavite State University – Imus Campus at Imus,

Cavite. The quantitative data gathering and analysis and the module development

took place during the second semester of A.Y. 2019-2020.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study aims to know the level of prejudice towards people with mental

illness among the students and employees of Cavite State University-Imus Campus

for A.Y. 2019-2020. The study was conducted inside the vicinity of the said

university. A total of four hundred (400) students were chosen as one of the

respondents of the study. To be able to adequately represent each programs,

 9

proportional allocation was used. On the other hand, for the employees, initially, total

population sampling was intended to be used. The study aimed to include all

employees whether it is from academic or non-academic department but due to

some unfortunate incidents such as the employees misplacing the survey

questionnaire and unavailability of the employees, only a total of seventy-four (74)

employees were able to participate in the study.

For the quantitative data gathering, the researchers used the Prejudice

towards People with Mental Illness (PPMI) Scale. PPMI Scale is an instrument that

measures and focuses on understanding one's concept of prejudice, which drives

their discriminatory behavior towards people with mental illness. It also includes

questions asked to the respondents specifically regarding their prejudices and the

underlying factors that influence their prejudice towards people with mental illness.

The respondents was also asked regarding their demographic profile such as their

gender but was used for the sole purpose of profiling. The results were then used as

the basis of the researchers for the module development. For this study, a total of

eight (8) modules were created. The eight (8) modules consist of four (4) modules for

the students and another four (4) modules for the employees with each module

representing each of the four domains of the PPMI Scale and containing three

activities. For the researchers to come up with the modules, the researchers based

on the mean scores of the items per domain in the survey questionnaire. The three

items having the highest mean scores from each of the four (4) domains became the

focus of each module. However, this study is limited only to the module development.

There will be no pilot testing of modules to be done within this study. The modules

created by the researchers was also draft modules and has not yet been evaluated

and validated by experts.

 10

Definition of Terms

Present in this section are the following terms used in this study. The

following terms are defined operationally for the readers, participants, and for other

researchers to understand their meaning as used in this research.

Avoidance. This term refers to the action of keeping away of a person from

a particular individual, situations and environment due to his/her anticipated feelings

and emotions attached with it or his/her anticipated negative outcomes.

Authoritarianism. This refers to the belief in the need to coercively control

people with mental illness.

Discrimination. This term is defined as the negative behaviors and actions

of people to a certain individual or group of people which rooted from their prejudice

towards certain characteristics of the individual or group.

Exclusion. This term refers to keeping an individual or group out of social

situations or events which roots from the idea that they have such undesirable

characteristics that does not fit in the social norms.

Fear. This refers to the belief in dangerousness of people with mental illness

and desire for social distance for them.

Malevolence. This refers to the belief in the inferiority of people with mental

illness and lack of sympathy for them.

Mental Illness. This term is defined as the different mental health conditions

that affects people negatively in a sense that their thinking, emotions and behavior

are being affected and compromised.

Prejudice. This refers to the prejudgment of people towards an individual or

a group which is unreasonable and formed without enough knowledge.

Psychoeducational Program. This refers to the education that will be given

to a certain group of people to improve their understanding regarding mental

conditions, self-knowledge on one's own mental health, coping skills and dealing with

the community for the improvement of life and emotional-well being.

 11

Stereotypes. This refers to the specific beliefs being attached to the group

such as how they look like physically, the way they behave, and their capabilities as

a person.

Stigma. This term refers to the set of negative beliefs of people and disgrace

being attached to an individual or group for having a certain characteristic such as

mental illness.

Unpredictability. This refers to the belief that the behavior of people with

mental illness is unpredictable.

Theoretical Framework

The research instrument that was used in this study was anchored to the

point of view of the social dominance theory. The principle of social dominance notes

that sustainable class hierarchy is preserved in part by using disproportionate force

toward inferior classes. Social dominance refers to circumstances where an

"individual or group regulates or dictates the actions of others, particularly in

competitive situations." The concept of social dominance is most frequently applied

to "learned relationships," shaped within individual dyads by a history of social

victories and defeats. Social dominance asymmetries, together with other forms of

power, are a key concept for understanding social institutions and for predicting

human behaviors (Ligneul & Dreher, 2017).

The theory of social dominance is a multi-level theory of how societies have

group-based dominance. Nearly all stable societies can be considered group-based

hierarchies of dominance in which one social group, often an ethnic, religious,

national or racial group, has disproportionate power and special privileges, and at

least one other group has relatively little political power or ease in their way of life. In

all situations, the social, academic, and medical results are equivalent to what they

are for subordinate group members for dominant group members. Moreover,

societies accept prevailing legal rights and view their way of life as noble and

representative of culture as a whole, whereas subordinates earn no social

 12

recognition and are even stigmatized (Pratto & Stewart, 2011). On the whole, the

concept of social dominance claims that the least coercive kind of peace which

communities might pursue would be the elimination of social inequality and the

acceptance of the freedom of all classes to receive what they need (Pratto & Stewart,

2011).

Conceptual Framework

Prejudice
Quantitative Data Modules Developed
toward People for
Gathering and
with Mental Psychoeducational
Analysis Program
Illness

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the study

Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the study. First, the researchers

gathered the needed data regarding the level of prejudice of the respondents towards

people with mental illness using the "Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness"

(PPMI) Scale. The statistical tools was then applied to the quantitative data gathered

for the analysis of the results and further understanding of the prejudice towards

people with mental illness of the respondents. The results from the quantitative data

analysis were then used by the researchers as their basis for their module

development for the psychoeducational program regarding mental health awareness.

 13

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents an overview of the explanation of the articles and

studies that has been reviewed by the researchers. Those that were included in this

chapter helped in familiarizing information that was relevant and similar to the

present study. It can possibly help the insights and direction of the study.

Prejudice

People are very different, and although we share a lot of similarities, we also

have a lot of differences. We belong to the social groups to help form our identities.

Many people may find it difficult to reconcile these differences, which can result in

hostility to people who are different. Prejudice is common for people belonging to an

alien cultural group. Thus, the tendency to prejudice can be reduced by certain types

of education, contact, interactions, and relationship building with members of different

cultural groups.

Prejudice is a prejudice based on insufficient knowledge. Prejudice can affect

another person's way of seeing. Prejudice may cause a person to ignore data that

runs counter to their prejudice (Good 2019 Therapy). Furthermore, prejudice can also

be described as an unfair and unreasonable opinion or feeling, especially about a

specific group of people without sufficient thought or knowledge (Cambridge

Dictionary, 2019).

Prejudice can have a powerful influence on how people act and communicate

with others, particularly those who are different from them. Prejudice is an irrational

and generally hostile attitude towards group members. Common prejudice

characteristics include negative feelings, stereotyped views, and a tendency to

discriminate against group members. Although precise definitions of social scientists '

bias may vary, most accept that it includes biases that are usually negative about a

group's members. If people have negative attitudes towards others, they appear to

see everyone who falls into a certain category as "all the same." They paint with a
 14

very broad brush any person who has particular characteristics or values and fail to

look at each individual as a unique individual (Cherry, 2019).

According to psychologist Gordon Allport, because of normal human thought,

bias and biases arise in part. It is important to sort knowledge into cognitive

categories in order to make sense of the world around us. "With the aid of categories,

human mind will think," Allport explained. "Once formed, categories are the basis of

normal prejudice. This process cannot possibly be avoided. It relies on organized

living" (Cherry, 2019).

In other words, people depend on their ability to place individuals, thoughts,

and objects in different categories to make the world easier to understand and

simpler. We are literally overwhelmed with too much data to handle it all in a logical,

methodical, and rational manner. The ability to categorize information quickly helps

them to easily communicate and respond, but it also leads to errors. Prejudice and

stereotyping are just two examples of mental errors arising from one's propensity to

categorize details in the world around them easily. Besides examining the reasons

why prejudice occurs, researchers have also explored various ways to reduce or

even eliminate prejudice. One method that has shown considerable success is to

train people to become more emphatic towards members of other groups. Through

putting themselves in the same situation, people can think about how they'd react

and get a bigger picture. Other techniques used to reduce prejudice include the

adoption of laws and regulations requiring fair and equal treatment for all groups of

people, public support and awareness of social norms against prejudice, awareness

of inconsistencies in their own convictions and enhanced interaction with members of

other social groups (Cherry, 2019).

In human history, prejudice and discrimination have prevailed. Prejudice is

linked to the inflexible and unreasonable attitudes and opinions held about another

by members of one group, while prejudice refers to actions directed against another

group. Usually being prejudiced means having preconceived beliefs about people's
 15

groups or cultural practices. Prejudices can be either positive or negative— both

forms are usually preconceived and hard to change. The negative type of bias can

lead to discrimination, while behaviors can be prejudiced and not act upon. Those

who practice racism, by denying access to those they believe, do not deserve the

same treatment as everyone else (Cliffs Notes, 2016).

Prejudice can lead to discrimination, but discrimination is not the only factor.

A person can also harbor prejudices without discrimination, particularly if he or she is

aware of his or her own prejudice and takes proactive action to counter it (Good

Therapy, 2019).

Discrimination is differential treatment of minorities and harmful actions (Khan

Academy, 2019). Discrimination affects the opportunities, well-being, and sense of

agency of individuals. Persistent exposure to discrimination can lead individuals to

internalize their prejudice or stigma, manifested in shame, low self-esteem, fear and

stress, and poor health (United Nations, 2018).

On the other hand, stereotypes, on the other hand, have historically been

described as specific beliefs about a group, such as explanations of what members

of a group look like, how they act, or their abilities. As such, stereotypes are mental

descriptions of how group members are related to each other and distinct from other

group members. Importantly, people can be aware of cultural stereotypes and have

cognitive representations of those beliefs without personal endorsement of such

stereotypes, without prejudice feelings, and without awareness that such stereotypes

might affect one's judgment and behavior. Prejudice and stereotyping are generally

regarded as the product of adaptive processes that simplify an otherwise complex

world so that more cognitive resources can be devoted to other tasks. Nonetheless,

given any cognitive adaptive purpose they can serve, such mental shortcuts can

have serious negative consequences when making decisions about other individuals

(Vescio & Weaver, 2017).

 16

Mental Illness

Collectively, mental illness refers to all diagnosable mental illnesses and

health conditions which involve significant changes in thought, attitude and/or actions

and depression or difficulties that work in social, job or family activities. Mental illness

does not discriminate; it can affect anyone irrespective of their age, gender,

geography, income, social status, race, religion, sexual orientation, background or

other cultural identity (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Similarly, according

to Celine (2014), mental disorder is a behavioral psychological variable that affects

the normal development of the culture of a person. In people of all regions, countries,

and societies, mental and behavioral disorders are found. It can be associated with

brain or nervous system functions.

The word mental illness encompasses more than 200 identified mental health

disorders listed in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders (DSM – V; APA, 2013) of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and

applies to diagnosable psychological disorders "characterized by dysregulation of

mood, thought and/or behavior" (Follmer & Jones, 2017). Mental illnesses vary in

severity (within and throughout disorders) as well as duration, and once diagnosed,

people can remain prone to the condition throughout their lifetime. Despite the often

chronic nature of these diseases, with the help of a trained professional, many can

be managed. Although the DSM–V offers guidelines that clinicians use to diagnose

an individual with one or more mental illnesses, a unique set of symptoms

characterizes each psychological disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

The word used to describe a wide range of mental and emotional disorders is

mental illness. Mental illness is also used to refer to other mental disabilities than

mental retardation, organic brain injury, and learning disabilities. The term

psychological disorder is used when mental illness interferes substantially with the

quality of important life tasks such as reading, thought, sleeping, eating and talking

among others (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

 17

In fact, mental illness, also known as mental health disorders, refers to a

broad range of mental health conditions — illnesses that affect the mood, mind, and

behavior. Examples of mental illness include depression, anxiety, psychosis, eating

disorders, and addictive behavior. Many people sometimes have mental health

concerns. But when on-going signs and symptoms cause frequent stress and affect

your ability to function, a mental health concern becomes a mental illness. A mental

illness can drive you insane and can cause problems in your everyday life, for

example at school or at work or in relationships. Symptoms can be treated with a

combination of medications and talk therapy in most cases (Mayo Clinic, 2019).

Mental illnesses, like physical illnesses, can take many forms. Most people

still fear and misinterpret mental illnesses, but as people learn more about them, fear

will vanish (Canadian Mental Health Association, 2019).

Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness

Social attitudes towards mentally disordered individuals date back to the

prehistoric era, claiming that they were' possessed by unclean spirits or a demon.'

They may be persecuted as witches in American Colonial days. Under public

perception, people diagnosed with mental illness live in a different environment from

those treated for' normal' conditions such as cancer or heart disease. It was known

that people with mental illness not only acted differently but looked different as well. It

has been believed that a person hospitalized for mental illness is unstable,

incompetent and unreliable.

Stigma is due to negative attitudes towards people with mental illness. Stigma

influences the relationships and social network of the client, job opportunities and

overall quality of life. It also decreases the self-esteem of the diagnosed person and

leads to a broken family relationship. Stigmatization may still exist to people whose

mental illness is in remission, even though their conduct is' natural' simply because

they have been admitted to a psychiatric hospital. Surprisingly, prejudice tends to

hinder the stigmatized lives even as their condition has progressed in care.
 18

Consequently, mental illness was still seen as an indulgence and a sign of

desperation (Gnanaguruvammal, 2010).

The mentally ill person's most horrific and painful experience is isolation and

loneliness. The family that once loved and cared for the person suddenly removes

the person from the rest of the family and neglects the needs of the mentally ill

person. After being institutionalized, most families refuse to take back their mentally

ill family members even after recovery from the illness, causing these already

unhappy people to completely lose confidence in others and their condition takes a

turn back into its worst. Besides the above, mentally ill people are also abused and

humiliated in ways that prohibit them from going and causing further physical pain

and hurt (Rotella, Gold & Adriani, 2002).

In addition to Gnanaguruvammal (2010), this notes that the stereotype mental

illness naming becomes so ingrained that the patient becomes stigmatized with the

stereotypical names even after recovery from the disease. Due to an unfortunate

illness they have encountered, people fail to understand their abilities and are denied

jobs for which they are qualified. This makes pulling up and gaining a level of

independence in the community difficult for the ex-mental patients.

Psychiatric stigmatization has led to widespread negative attitudes among the

population against mentally ill. Stigma and discrimination are the main obstacles that

mentally ill people face today, and it is the embarrassment and uncertainty of this

prejudice that keeps mentally ill people from finding help and treatment for their

disorders (World Health Organization, 2001).

Mental illness behaviors are deeply rooted in culture. Adverse attitudes affect

the provision of services of mental health. The definition of mental illness is often

synonymous with concern that patients with such illness can present a potential

threat.
 19

Prejudice in the Academe towards people with Mental Illness

Recent research from the United States studied how discrimination had been

faced by young people diagnosed and treated with' psychiatric disorders,' including

from their parents, friends, and within the school setting. Approximately half of youth

interviews revealed experiences in which family members had discriminated against

them in some way (e.g. behaviors such as blame, avoidance or mistrust). Nearly two-

thirds of the sample identified some peer stigma (such as being rejected by friends)

and about one in three had school staff experience treating them in a negative or

demeaning manner (Mental Health Foundation of New Zealand, 2014).

Similarly, Moses (2010) as cited by Davey (2013) It was noticed that prejudice

targeted toward mentally ill teenagers originated from family members, friends, and

educators. 46% of these teens identified enduring stigmatization by family members

in the context of unjustified judgments (e.g. bullying the sufferer), mistrust,

indifference, sympathy and gossip, 62% encountered peer stigma, which often

resulted in loss of intimacy and social rejection, and 35% of teachers and school

workers reported prejudice reflecting terror, hate, indifference, and underestimation

of skills.

A 2010 study found that teenagers with mental health issues have faced

shame and racism in a variety of settings, including colleges, health services, and

news, as well as friends and family. Negative experiences involved getting

insufficient data from health practitioners; not being heard; harassment, mocking, and

chattering; and lack of instructor help. There have been studies of a number of

potential effects, including decreased self-esteem and avoidance of social situations,

and work has illustrated the need for school education for both staff and students

(Mental Health Foundation of New Zealand, 2014).

A study also found that educators and lecturers are called the second most

common stigma victims, with 29% of young people citing discrimination toward

respondents with mental health problems. Again, many of the stigma reported by
 20

young people from their teachers and lecturers was due to a lack of awareness of

mental health problems. In fact, a large part of this occurred in teachers and lecturers

who were unintentionally ill equipped to communicate with and support young people

(YMCA, 2016).

Prejudice in the Workplace towards People with Mental Illness

Thornicroft and colleagues as cited by Dewa (2014), identified negative

attitudes as a major component of stigma (i.e., prejudice). Such biases can become

harmful behavior (i.e. discrimination). As Thornicroft et al. point out, numerous

studies have been conducted to describe the substance of negative attitudes. The

negative attitudes, anticipated or actual, can become a major deterrent to help the

workplace search.

Such negative attitudes frequently take the form of terror. There is concern

among the general public that mental illness is linked to violence. There is also the

assumption that symptoms can result in unwanted behavior or unpredictability.

Among the working population, these fears of violence and unpredictability also exist.

In conjunction with unpredictability, there is also the concern that mentally ill workers

will be generally less effective, resulting in additional work for other employees

(Dewa, 2014).

People with mental illness are often characterized as dysfunctional, inept,

insane and dangerous (Corrigan, Kerr, & Knudson, 2005)— features that are

incompatible with the desirable attributes of the employee. Concerns identified

include the perception that people with mental health problems have reduced

effectiveness and job performance, especially in activities involving cognitive skills,

are incompetent and may present a threat to the safety of other workers, clients or

themselves, or act in an unusual and erratic way, and the possibility for symptoms to

recur. (Scheid, 2005).

Several studies have supported previous findings that employees are highly

stigmatized by mental illness. Several research have shown that the general public,
 21

workers and supervisors were anxious about the employability of people with mental

illness (Dietrich, Mergl, & Rummnel-Kluge, 2014). One survey of Japanese workers

showed the lack of knowledge of depression and suicide among students, including

attitudes and values of people at risk of suicide. In addition, almost 25% of

respondents reported having unfavorable attitudes towards depressed colleagues

(Nakayama & Amagasa, 2004). Similar findings were published in a case study

undertaken by a privately owned Canadian company (Hauck & Chard, 2009) in which

employees and managers examined whether lack of understanding regarding

depression influenced how people with depression were viewed or interpreted by

others at work. For this reason, workers with depression or other mental disease may

be adversely viewed due to a lack of awareness about their disorder(s).

Stereotypical beliefs about people with mental illness can also give rise to

concerns about their ability to perform and hire. Using a mixed methodology, Biggs,

Hovey, Tyson, and MacDonald (2010) stated that while career coaches recognized

the benefits of working with people with mental illness and were comfortable putting

these people forward for employment, most employers were worried about how a

condition would compete with the performance of employees. Managers, however,

have concerns in recruiting people with mental illness. Follmer and Jones (2017)

reported that workers with depression and bipolar disorder are considered to be

higher in competence and comfort, while workers with anxiety were perceived to be

low in competence. Likewise, a vignette analysis representing workers with

borderline personality disorder showed that negative attitudes towards these people

emerged while they took leave of work due to their condition but did not reveal

behavioral changes once they returned to work (Sage, Brooks, Jones, & Greenberg,

2016).

Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness (PPMI) Scale

While there is a substantial body of research on stigma related to mental

illness, much of the existing research has not explicitly focused on the concept of
 22

prejudice that drives discriminatory behavior. In the workforce, however, there are

statistical, philosophical, and psychometric limitations that have explored

discrimination against mentally ill people. The scale of Prejudice towards People with

Mental Illness (PPMI) has been developed to address these limitations, focusing on

better conceptualization and incorporation of research areas of discrimination and

prejudice. In response to limitations of existing measures, Kenny, Bizumic and

Griffiths (2018) developed the Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness (PPMI)

scale. This scale showed a solid theoretical and statistical basis, including in item

selection methods and validation of scale. A thematic analysis was carried out on the

27 items in scales measuring stigma towards people with MI in the initial

development of the PPMI. Three experts gave ratings on a pool of 179 items in

mental illness and scale construction. In this process, seven themes related to

attitudes towards people with MI were identified (dangerousness, unpredictability,

authoritarianism, inferiority, social distance, interaction difficulty, & malevolence) and

the 68 items which best reflected these themes (e.g., dangerousness; ‘I think people

with mental illness often pose a risk to other people’) were selected. Confirmatory

factor analysis showed that these seven topics were not considered as factors

(Gunningham, 2018).

Across three trials and in different cultural communities, the PPMI measure

showed a strong four-factor framework. This is important because commonly

established perceptions about individuals with MI, such as Opinions about Mental

Illness (OMI) Scale and Community Attitudes to the Mental Ill (CAMI) Scale, do not

show a replicable variable model. Results also demonstrated the PPMI scale's

simultaneous validity by correlating it with the CAMI scale. This is an important

finding because the scale of PPMI is shorter and psychometric properties have

improved. The four factors were interrelated and the overall scale was reliable, with

the Cronbach’s alphas above .90 in each study (study 1 α=.93, study2 α=.91, study3

α=.91). It indicates that the objects provided significant internal continuity to describe
 23

them as a metric for evaluating bias as a multidimensional structure (Kenny, Bizumic

& Griffiths, 2018).

Exploratory factor analysis was therefore carried out on a group of 301

respondents and identified a four-factor construct consisting of fear / avoidance

(belief in the dangerousness of people with MI and desire for social isolation from

them), unpredictability (belief that the conduct of people with MI is unpredictable),

authoritarianism (belief in the need for arbitrary MI control) and malevolence. With

the 28 objects that better represented the four variables, a balanced (equal amount

of positive and negative items) scale was developed. A second study was conducted

(Kenny et al., 2018) in which the 28-item PPMI was administered to a sample of 168

undergraduate students. Confirmatory factor analysis In a third study in the same

journal, in a survey of 495 respondents recruited online, Kenny and colleagues

presented additional evidence of construct and convergent validity by positive factor

analysis and comparisons with potentially associated variables. Kenny and

colleagues were also the first to explore a number of constructs that correlate with

prejudice towards other marginalized groups in relation to prejudice against people

with MI. Which included empathy, Big Five personality traits, right wing

authoritarianism (RWA; a personal ideology valuing conventionalism, conformity,

adherence to authority and militant authoritarian power and social dominance

orientation (SDO; a personal ideology including belief in supremacy within one's own

party and preference for its hegemony over other groups; in addition to previous

contact, both of which substantially predicted behaviors on the PPMI. Intriguingly,

they observed that SDO and RWA were the factors that better projected

discrimination, as is the case for views towards other communities such as

foreigners, gays, and racial or ethnic groups. Eventually, it did not associate with

socially desirable steps, suggesting that it is fairly free of bias in reaction to

desirability (Gunningham, 2018).

 24

Mental Health in the Philippines

The Philippines has recently passed its first Mental Health Act (Republic Act

no. 11036). The Act seeks to establish links to adequate, effective mental health

services thus safeguarding the interests of mentally disordered individuals and

members of their family. Mental health, however, remains poorly resourced: only 3-

5% of the overall health budget is spent on mental health, 70% of which is spent on

hospital care (Lally, Tully & Samaniego, 2019).

Accordingly, most mental health care is provided in hospital settings and

community mental health services are underdeveloped. Previously, it was estimated

that the National Center for Mental Health accounted for 67 percent of psychiatric

beds available nationwide. There are only two psychiatric tertiary care hospitals:

Mandaluyong City's National Mental Health Center, Metro Manila (4200 beds) and

Bataan, Luzon's Mariveles Mental Hospital (500 beds). There are 12 smaller,

country-wide satellite hospitals affiliated with the National Center for Mental Health.

Overcrowding, poorly functioning units, chronic shortages of staff and funding

constraints, especially in peripheral facilities, are ongoing issues. There are no

dedicated forensic hospitals, although the National Center for Mental Health has

forensic beds (Lally, Tully & Samaniego, 2019).

There is 1 doctor for every 80 000 Filipinos (WHO & Department of

Health, 2012); this scarcity contributes to the emigration of trained specialists to other

countries, especially English-speaking countries. The scarcity was magnified in

medicine, where there are in training a little over 500 psychologists at the national

level. In the Philippines, the ratio of mental health workers per population is low at 2-

3 per 100,000 people. Such numbers collectively reflect a severe shortage of

professionals in mental health in the Philippines. This is further highlighted by the

international goal of 10 psychiatrists per 100,000 population proposed by the World

Health Organization (WHO). In contrast, the majority of psychiatrists operate in for-

 25

profit facilities or private practices, primarily in major urban areas, particularly in the

capital region known as Metro Manila (Lally, Tully & Samaniego, 2019).

Mental disorders in the Philippines have little epidemiological evidence;

however, some significant data are available. For example, a mental disorder has

been identified as having 14 percent of a community of 1.4 million Filipinos with

disabilities. The National Statistical Office has classified mental illness as the fifth

most common cause of morbidity, but the fact that only 88 instances of mental health

problems have been recorded for every 100,000 people is likely to overlook the true

extent of these problems (DOH, 2005; Lally, Tully & Samaniego, 2019).

Based on the DOH website, which was last updated in 2018, At least 19

million Filipinos suffer from schizophrenia, and are considered bipolar. The largest

group, 17 million, is made up of people with major depressive disorder. In addition,

the DOH's Disease Prevention And Control Bureau-Essential Non-Communicable

Disease Division said 5% of Filipinos over the age of 65 had dementia. In addition,

the DOH unit noted that World Health Organization (WHO) studies showed that 16

percent of students between the ages of 13 and 15 had seriously considered

attempting suicide; while 13 percent had actually attempted suicide one or more

times over the past year. A study conducted by government employees in Metro

Manila also showed that 32% of the 327 participants encountered a mental health

problem during their lives (Medenilia, Ordinario & Manawis, 2019).

In addition, the Philippines has one of the highest cases of depression in

Southeast Asia, affecting more than three million Filipinos. It is recognized as a

serious health condition by our own Department of Health (DOH), and the weight of

haplessness, hopelessness, and helplessness — the three feared' H' signs of

depression— gravitates into what is now the new high-risk group: the teens, "she

stated. Citing a study from the World Health Organization in 2017, Robes said eight

people commit suicide in every 100,000 Filipinos. Six of them are males, while two

are women, between the ages of 15 and 29. Researchers linked the rise in suicide
 26

cases to social media, evolving environment and loss of family and community care,

culminating in a combination of "risk factors" such as social disconnection and

deterioration of "helpful factors" such as genuine relationships and healthy lifestyles.

Most individuals lack a sense of purpose in life and feel disconnectedness and

worsening social media and technology relationships. Relationships or support at

home may not be healthier anyway, if parents lose quality time with their children

because of their busy schedule or if one or both of them work abroad (Punay, 2019).

Around 1984 and 2005, rates of suicidal occurrence in the Philippines rose

from 0.23 to 3.59 in males per 100,000 and from 0.12 to 1.09 in females per 100,000.

The new 2016 data showed an average suicide rate of 3.2/100,000, with a higher

rate of males (4.3/100,000) than females (2.0/100,000) (WHO, 2018; Lally, Tully &

Samaniego, 2019).

Prohibitive economic conditions and mental health services inaccessibility

limit Philippine access to mental health care. In fact, perceived or internalized

prejudice has been shown to be a deterrent to helping Filipinos improve change

(Tuliao, 2014), just as is the case in Western populations. There is a cultural drive to'

save face' when one's social position is threatened or lost, and as such Filipinos may

find it difficult to admit to mental health issues or seek help. There is a deep sense of

family in the Philippines and so, before seeking medical help, Filipinos would turn to

relatives and peer networks when issues are perceived to be socially linked

(Tuliao, 2014)

Mental healthcare faces persistent problems in the Philippines, including

underinvestment, lack of mental health practitioners and underdeveloped mental

health services in the country. Although the recent legislation on mental health has

established –for the first time–a legal framework for the provision of effective mental

healthcare, financial barriers as well as the stigma surrounding mental illness which

constantly prohibits people from accessing mental healthcare should be addressed in

order to enable the community to receive adequate care equitably where required.
 27

Synthesis

Mental health is a vital part of one's life. Thanks to a sound mental wellbeing,

people will conduct their duties well and adjust to the daily challenges of their daily

lives. While, on the other hand, mental illness refers collectively to all diagnosable

mental disorders and health conditions that cause significant negative changes in

one's thoughts, emotions and/or behaviors and distress or problems that work in

social, work or family activities. Unfortunately, although there are increasing cases of

mental illness in the Philippines, there is a shortage of Filipinos awareness about

mental health which contributes to the growth of stigma against people with mental

illness. Prejudice is the basic and usually negative attitude towards a group's

members. People tend to have negative feelings with this prejudice, stereotyped

beliefs, and a tendency to discriminate against group members. The struggle to have

a mental illness that disturbs one's life on a day-to-day basis is already a very

challenging experience, but with the presence of prejudice and the judgments of

people around them, it becomes even more difficult because, instead of considering

one's own mental well-being, they also have to deal with other people and their

judgments that can lead to feeding.

The likelihood of prejudice against people with mental illness can never be

ignored in both the academic and workplace setting, particularly if there is also a lack

of awareness regarding mental health and mental illness. Overall, people come up

with these prejudices because of lack of knowledge about a particular topic; with this,

exposure and continuous implementation of programs that raise awareness about

mental health and mental illness could pave the way for reducing, if not removing, the

prejudice to people with mental illness.

 28

METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the methods that the researchers utilized in order to

gather the necessary data needed for the study. This chapter also includes the

research design, respondents of the study, sampling technique, data gathering

procedures and the statistical tools which the researchers will be using in conducting

the study.

Research Design

This study utilized the quantitative research design. Quantitative research

design is a method which relies on measuring variables using a numerical system

and focuses on the use of mathematical and statistical tools in collecting data,

analyzing data and deriving results. It involves gathering of data in order to describe,

understand and predict such phenomenon. Specifically, this study used survey in

gathering data which then undergone statistical analysis, and the results was then

used as a basis for module development.

This study is also under the descriptive-comparative research design. In

descriptive research design, the subject's actions must be recorded and defined

without any coercion or interference in any way (Shuttleworth, 2008). While in

comparative research design, it compares and contrasts two or more variables for

research purposes and offers a deeper understanding of the similarities and

differences between the variables in question.

This study mainly focuses on understanding the prejudice towards people

with mental illness of the respondents based from the data gathered using the survey

forms in order to have a foundation for the module development. This study also

involved comparison of the mean scores of the two different groups of participants,

the students and the employees.

 29

Participants of the Study

The respondents of the study were the students and employees of Cavite

State University-Imus Campus for A.Y. 2019-2020. A total of four hundred (400)

students were selected from the total population of the students which were currently

enrolled for the second semester of A.Y. 2019-2020. While for the employees,

initially, the study aimed to include all employees whether it is from academic or non-

academic department, but due to some unfortunate incidents such as the employees

misplacing the survey questionnaire and unavailability of the employees, only a total

of seventy-four (74) employees were able to participate in the study. In selecting the

appropriate number of respondents, according to Bullen (2014), usually around 10

percent of the population would be good maximum sample size, as long as it does

not exceed 1000. For instance, 10 percent would be 500 in a population of 5000.

Having a total of four thousand eight hundred seventy two (4782) students enrolled

during the second semester, the researchers then decided to have a sample size of

four hundred (400) students.

Sampling Technique

In selecting the respondents of the study, stratified random sampling with

proportional allocation was used for the students, while for the employees, total

population sampling was applied. Stratified random sampling is a sampling method

where samples are taken from the population and further divided into smaller groups

based on their shared attributes or features (Nickolas, 2019). For this study, the

respondents will be divided based from their demographic profiles. In taking unbiased

number of sample size from the population, proportional allocation will be used.

Proportional allocation is a method which involves the adequate production of a

population sample that will be representative of the stratum in accordance with its

population number (Pondent, 2017).

On the other hand, total population sampling, which will be used in selecting

the employees, is a type of sampling technique which involves the examination of the
 30

entire population. Which means that for this study, each of the employees of Cavite

State University-Imus Campus, academic or non-academic, will be included in the

study. The use of this method enables the researchers to have a better

understanding of the knowledge and awareness of the employees whether it is

academic or non-academic employees.

Data to be Gathered

Brainstorming for the Research Topic

Review of Related Literature and Studies

Letter for the Locale

Selection of the Respondents

Survey using the PPMI Scale

Statistical Analysis of the Data Gathered

Construction of Modules

Figure 2. Data gathering flowchart of the study

Data Gathering Procedure. The researchers started the study by

brainstorming to find a topic for the research study. Followed by coming up with a title

for the study to be approved upon the research proposal defense. After one title has

been approved, it was followed by choosing the target population or the participants

of the study and as well as the research locale for the study. The target population

was the students and employees, and the research locale of the study was the

Cavite State University - Imus Campus from which four hundred (400) students

together with seventy-four (74) employees of the university participated in the study.

Then it was followed by the review of related literatures and studies for the

researchers to have a better understanding of their study, to have a foundation for

 31

their study and to gather data that can support the results of their study. Then the

researchers submitted a letter to the locale for the study to be approved and to be

able to be conducted in the locale.

Upon the approval of the research locale, the researchers then proceed to the

data gathering from the respondents through survey using the Prejudice towards

People with Mental Illness (PPMI) Scale, wherein the respondents are going to be

asked regarding their prejudice towards people with mental illness and the underlying

factors that are behind it.

The data gathered from the respondents then undergone statistical treatment

to analyze and for a better understanding of the results. The results of the statistical

analysis were then used by the researchers as their basis for the construction of

modules. For this study, a total of eight (8) modules were created. The eight (8)

modules consist of four (4) modules for the students and another four (4) modules for

the employees with each module representing each of the four domains of the PPMI

Scale and containing three activities. For the researchers to come up with the

activities within the modules, the researchers based on the mean scores of the items

per domain in the survey questionnaire. The three items having the highest mean

scores from each of the four (4) domains became the focus of each module. This

idea and method of creating the modules was based on a study by Bolier, Haverman,

Kramer, Westerhof, Riper, Walburg & Boon (2013), where a program called Psyfit

has 6 modules, each with a 4-lesson program: (1) personal mission statement and

goal setting, (2) positive feelings, (3) healthy relationships, (4) empathy, (5)

constructive thinking, and (6) mastering your life. The training has psycho-education

and a practical practice every week. Participants, as long as they were in sequence,

could start and finish modules as they wished.

Research Instruments. While there is a substantial body of research on

stigma related to mental illness, much of the existing research has not explicitly

focused on the concept of prejudice that drives discriminatory behavior. In the

 32

workplace, however, there are empirical, theoretical, and psychometric

disadvantages that have examined prejudice to mentally ill people. The scale of

Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness (PPMI) has been developed to address

these limitations, focusing on better conceptualization and incorporation of research

areas of discrimination and prejudice. In response to limitations of existing measures,

Kenny, Bizumic and Griffiths (2018) developed the Prejudice towards People with

Mental Illness (PPMI) scale.

Validity and Reliability. Across three trials and in different cultural

communities, the PPMI measure showed a strong four-factor framework. This is

important because commonly established perceptions about individuals with MI, such

as Opinions about Mental Illness (OMI) Scale and Community Attitudes to the Mental

Ill (CAMI) Scale, do not show a replicable variable model. Results also demonstrated

the PPMI scale's simultaneous validity by correlating it with the CAMI scale. This is

an important finding because the scale of PPMI is shorter and psychometric

properties have improved. The four factors were interrelated and the overall scale

was reliable, with the Cronbach’s alphas above .90 in each study (study 1 α=.93,

study2 α=.91, study3 α=.91). It indicates that the objects provided significant internal

continuity to describe them as a metric for evaluating bias as a multidimensional

structure (Kenny, Bizumic & Griffiths, 2018).

Scoring. All items marked * are reverse-scored (e.g., -4 is scored as +4, -3

as +3, -2 as +2, etc.). Total Prejudice score: the sum of all items divided by 28. The

Fear/Avoidance score: the sum of items 1-8 divided by 8. The Unpredictability score:

the sum of items 9-14 divided by 6. The Authoritarianism score: the sum of items 15-

20 divided by 6. The Malevolence score: the sum of items 21-28 divided by 8.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The researchers used the following statistical tools to identify the mean

scores, frequency and percentage of the data obtained from this study. These
 33

statistical tools helped the researchers to evaluate and analyze the data gathered

from the respondents regarding their prejudice towards people with mental illness.

Frequency Distribution – is the number by which a particular phenomenon

occurred; its distribution shows a summary grouping of data divided into classes that

are mutually exclusive and the number of occurrences in the class. In this analysis,

frequency distribution will be used to classify the classification-based distribution of

the respondents.

Percentage – is the way numbers are expressed as a fraction of 100. It was

used to describe the entire population in terms of the portion of categorization of the

responses to their respective levels. Percentage will also be used in this study to

identify the classification-based distribution of respondents.

%= ( nf ) 100
Where:

% = percentage

f = frequency

n = sample population

Mean – is the average data set. The average is equal to the sum of all data

set values divided by the data set number of values. Mean will be used for this study

to identify the respondent's level of prejudice to people with mental illness.

Σx
x̄=
n

Where:

x̄ = mean

Σ = “Sigma” which means “summation of”

x = number of the values

n = total number of values in the data set or sample size

 34

Independent T-test – is used to compare the means of two independent

groups to determine whether statistical evidence exists that the associated means of

population are significantly different. In this study, the independent t-test will be used

in identifying if there is a significant difference between the level of prejudice between

the students and employees.

x1 – x2
t=

√
SD12 SD22
+
N N

Ethical Considerations

To ensure that the study conforms to the highest ethical standards of a

psychological research, the researchers used the PAP Code of Ethics as a guide in

this study to consider and protect the rights of the respondents. In accordance with

the Article X. Research, Section A. Rights and Dignity of Participants, the

researchers respect the rights in all ways, protect the integrity, and preserve and

support the health of participants in the study. To ensure that the interests of

participants are secured, the researchers pursue objective and thorough ethical

analysis of the potential risks that the research should present to them; Section B.

Informed Consent to Research, the researchers will not just ask participants to sign

the consent form; they understand that informed consent is due to the ability of the

participants to work in partnership with them. The researchers will also ensure that

the consent form is translated into the language or dialect understood by the

participants. They will take reasonable steps to ensure comprehension of the

information; Section H. Debriefing, the researchers will debrief by telling the

participants that they have contributed to the body of knowledge and making sure

they have also benefited from their involvement. The researchers will provide

participants with an opportunity to obtain the research's existence, findings, and

conclusions. They will also take reasonable steps to correct any misunderstandings
 35

that participants have about the research, especially when the participants have been

led to believe that the research has a different purpose; Section L. Plagiarism, the

researchers do not view any portion of the research or information of others as their

own, even if the main source is sometimes cited; lastly Section N. Duplicate

Publication of Data, the researchers does not release the previously published

information nor assert it as original data. This does not, however, prevent the

republication of information as long as proper acknowledgment is clearly stated.

 36

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter includes different tables that deals with the presentation,

analysis and interpretation of statistical data gathered from the respondents

regarding their prejudice towards people with mental illness. This chapter also

includes the proposal of draft modules constructed in this study.

Table 1. Mean scores of the students in terms of their prejudice towards people with
mental illness
Subscale Mean SD
Fear 4.09 .93
Malevolence 3.30 1.03
Authoritarianism 4.42 1.03
Unpredictability 5.78 .96

Table 1 shows the mean scores of the students in terms of their prejudice

towards people with mental illness in terms of the four domains. Based from the data

gathered, the computed mean was 4.09 for the domain of fear, with a standard

deviation value of .93, 3.30 for the domain of malevolence, with a standard deviation

value of 1.03, 4.42 for the domain of authoritarianism, with a standard deviation value

of 1.03, and 5.78 for the domain of unpredictability, with a standard deviation value of

.96.

Having low to neutral levels of prejudice can be considered normal. According

to psychologist Gordon Allport, because of normal human thought, bias and biases

arise in part. It is important to sort knowledge into cognitive categories in order to

make sense of the world around us. "With the aid of categories, human mind will

think," Allport explained. "Once formed, categories are the basis of normal prejudice.

This process cannot possibly be avoided. It relies on organized living" (Cherry,

2019). With the concept and idea of mental health having a wide range of things to

understand and information to grasp, the probability of misunderstanding of

 37

information and the occurrence of having prejudice towards people with mental

illness can never be denied.

Table 2. Mean scores of the employees in terms of their prejudice towards people
with mental illness
Subscale Mean SD
Fear 4.38 1.02
Malevolence 3.44 1.09
Authoritarianism 4.77 1.05
Unpredictability 5.73 1.06

Table 2 shows the mean scores of the employees in terms of their prejudice

towards people with mental illness in terms of the four domains. Based from the data

gathered, the computed mean was 4.38 for the domain of fear, with a standard

deviation value of 1.02, 3.44 for the domain of malevolence, with a standard

deviation value of 1.09, 4.77 for the domain of authoritarianism, with a standard

deviation value of 1.05, and 5.73 for the domain of unpredictability, with a standard

deviation value of 1.06.

Having low to neutral levels of prejudice can be considered normal. According

to psychologist Gordon Allport, because of normal human thought, bias and biases

arise in part. It is important to sort knowledge into cognitive categories in order to

make sense of the world around us. "With the aid of categories, human mind will

think," Allport explained. "Once formed, categories are the basis of normal prejudice.

This process cannot possibly be avoided. It relies on organized living" (Cherry,

2019). With the concept and idea of mental health having a wide range of things to

understand and information to grasp, the probability of misunderstanding of

information and the occurrence of having prejudice towards people with mental

illness can never be denied

Table 3. Test of difference of the prejudice towards people with mental illness
between students and employees in terms of fear
p-value
Students Employees t-value df (2 Decision Significance
tailed)
 38

4.09 4.38 -2.44 472 .015* Reject null Significant

hypothesis
*significant at p < 0.05

Table 3 shows test of difference between the mean scores of the students

and employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms of the

domain of fear. Independent t-test was used to determine if there is a significant

difference between the prejudice of the students and employees in terms of the

domain of fear.

Based from the data gathered, results showed that computed t-statistic was -

2.44 with degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated probability value of .015

which is less than the critical value of .05. This signifies that there is a significant

difference between the mean scores of the participants in terms of the domain of

fear; therefore the null hypothesis is rejected.

Table 4. Test of difference of the prejudice towards people with mental illness
between students and employees in terms of malevolence
t- p-value
Students Employees df (2 Decision Significance
value
tailed)
3.30 3.44 -1.08 472 .283* Accept null Not Significant
hypothesis
*significant at p < 0.05

Table 4 shows test of difference between the mean scores of the students

and employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms of the

domain of malevolence. Independent t-test was used to determine if there is a

significant difference between the prejudice of the students and employees in terms

of the domain of malevolence.

Based from the data gathered, results showed that computed t-statistic was -

1.08 with degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated probability value of .283

which is greater than the critical value of .05. This signifies that there is no significant
 39

difference between the mean scores of the participants in terms of the domain of

malevolence; therefore the null hypothesis is accepted.

Table 5. Test of difference of the prejudice towards people with mental illness
between students and employees in terms of authoritarianism
t- p-value
Students Employees df (2 Decision Significance
value
tailed)
4.42 4.77 -2.72 472 .007* Reject null Significant
hypothesis
*significant at p < 0.05

Table 5 shows test of difference between the mean scores of the students

and employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms of the

domain of authoritarianism. Independent t-test was used to determine if there is a

significant difference between the prejudice of the students and employees in terms

of the domain of authoritarianism.

Based from the data gathered, results showed that computed t-statistic was -

2.72 with degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated probability value of .007

which is less than the critical value of .05. This signifies that there is a significant

difference between the mean scores of the participants in terms of the domain of

authoritarianism; therefore the null hypothesis is rejected.

Table 6. Test of difference of the prejudice towards people with mental illness
between students and employees in terms of unpredictability
t- p-value
Students Employees df (2 Decision Significance
value
tailed)
5.78 5.73 .408 472 .683* Accept null Not Significant
hypothesis
*significant at p < 0.05

Table 6 shows test of difference between the mean scores of the students

and employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms of the

domain of unpredictability. Independent t-test was used to determine if there is a

 40

significant difference between the prejudice of the students and employees in terms

of the domain of unpredictability.

Based from the data gathered, results showed that computed t-statistic

was .408 with degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated probability value of .683

which is greater than the critical value of .05. This signifies that there is no significant

difference between the mean scores of the participants in terms of the domain of

unpredictability; therefore the null hypothesis is accepted.

 41

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contains the summary, conclusions, and recommendations of

the study that were based from the data gathered by the researchers throughout the

entire study and that has been presented in the previous chapters that contains

detailed results, discussion, analyses and interpretation of the data gathered for a

better understanding of the study.

Summary

The study entitled "Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness: Module

Development towards Psychoeducational Program" aimed to know if there is a

presence of prejudice towards people with mental illness among the respondents in

Cavite State University-Imus Campus and to develop modules for psychoeducational

program that can help in raising awareness on mental health and removing the

stigma and prejudice that surrounds the concept of mental health and mental illness.

In addition to this, by understanding the underlying factors that causes the prejudice

of people towards people with mental illness and with the help of the modules to be

created from this study, the university will be able to have its own program that the

Guidance and Counseling office can implement and utilize which can help educate

students and employees on how to interact, communicate and socialize with people

with mental illness.

The respondents of the study were the students and employees of Cavite

State University-Imus Campus for A.Y. 2019-2020. A total of four hundred (400)

students were selected from the total population of the students currently enrolled for

the second semester of A.Y. 2019-2020. While a total of seventy-four (74) employees

were able to participate in the study, including employees coming from the academic

and non-academic department. In selecting the respondents of the study, stratified

random sampling with proportional allocation was used for the students, while for the

employees, total population sampling was applied.

 42

The study utilized the quantitative research design wherein the study used a

survey questionnaire in gathering data which then undergo statistical analysis, and

the results were then used as a basis for module development. The study was also

under the descriptive-comparative research design as it involves comparison of the

mean scores of the students and employees.

For the quantitative data gathering, the researchers used the Prejudice

towards People with Mental Illness (PPMI) Scale. PPMI Scale is an instrument that

measures and focuses on understanding one's concept of prejudice, which drives

their discriminatory behavior towards people with mental illness. It also includes

questions asked to the respondents specifically regarding their prejudices and the

underlying factors that influence their prejudice towards people with mental illness.

Based on the results of the study, the presence of prejudice towards people

with mental illness within the campus can be described as somehow to be minimal as

based from the data gathered from the survey questionnaire of the respondents,

wherein the mean scores of both the students and employees fall down from low to

average levels of prejudice. When it comes to the mean scores of the respondents in

relation to the four (4) domains of the PPMI Scale, results shown that there is no

significant difference in the mean scores of their prejudice towards people with

mental illness in the domains of malevolence and unpredictability which accepts the

null hypothesis. On the other hand, results also shown that there is a significant

difference in the mean scores of their prejudice towards people with mental illness in

the domains of fear and authoritarianism which then rejects the null hypothesis.

For this study, a total of eight (8) modules were created. The eight (8)

modules consist of four (4) modules for the students and another four (4) modules for

the employees with each module representing each of the four domains of the PPMI

Scale and containing three activities. For the researchers to come up with the

activities within the modules, the researchers based on the mean scores of the items
 43

per domain in the survey questionnaire. The three items having the highest mean

scores from each of the four (4) domains became the focus of each module.

Conclusions

The study aimed to know if there is a presence of prejudice towards people

with mental illness among the respondents in Cavite State University-Imus Campus

and to develop modules for psychoeducational program that can help in raising

awareness on mental health and removing the stigma and prejudice that surrounds

the concept of mental health and mental illness. Based from the four (4) domains of

the Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness (PPMI) Scale, four modules were

created for the students and another four modules for the employees with each

module consisting of three (3) activities which was based on the items with the

highest mean scores per domain.

After a thorough and careful understanding and interpretations of the data

gathered, the researchers have come up with these conclusions:

1. The computed mean scores of the students in terms of their prejudice

towards people with mental illness was 4.09 for the domain of fear, with a

standard deviation value of .93, 3.30 for the domain of malevolence, with a

standard deviation value of 1.03, 4.42 for the domain of authoritarianism, with

a standard deviation value of 1.03, and 5.78 for the domain of unpredictability,

with a standard deviation value of .96.

2. The computed mean scores of the employees in terms of their prejudice

towards people with mental illness was 4.38 for the domain of fear, with a

standard deviation value of 1.02, 3.44 for the domain of malevolence, with a

standard deviation value of 1.09, 4.77 for the domain of authoritarianism, with

a standard deviation value of 1.05, and 5.73 for the domain of unpredictability,

with a standard deviation value of 1.06.

3. Based from test of difference between the mean scores of the students and

employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms of
 44

the domain of fear, results showed that computed t-statistic was -2.44 with

degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated probability value of .015 which

is less than the critical value of .05. This signifies that there is a significant

difference between the mean scores of the participants in terms of the domain

of fear; therefore the null hypothesis is rejected.

4. Based from test of difference between the mean scores of the students and

employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in terms of

the domain of malevolence, results showed that computed t-statistic was -

1.08 with degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated probability value

of .283 which is greater than the critical value of .05. This signifies that there

is no significant difference between the mean scores of the participants in

terms of the domain of malevolence; therefore the null hypothesis is

accepted.

5. Based from the test of difference between the mean scores of the students

and employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in

terms of the domain of authoritarianism, results showed that computed t-

statistic was -2.72 with degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated

probability value of .007 which is less than the critical value of .05. This

signifies that there is a significant difference between the mean scores of the

participants in terms of the domain of authoritarianism; therefore the null

hypothesis is rejected.

6. Based from the test of difference between the mean scores of the students

and employees with their prejudice towards people with mental illness in

terms of the domain of unpredictability, results showed that computed t-

statistic was .408 with degrees of freedom of 472 and its associated

probability value of .683 which is greater than the critical value of .05. This

signifies that there is no significant difference between the mean scores of the
 45

participants in terms of the domain of unpredictability; therefore the null

hypothesis is accepted.

7. When it comes to the items that had the highest mean scores per domain, for

the students, in terms of the domain of fear were items no. 1 where they find it

hard to talk to someone with mental illness, no. 5 meaning they experience

difficulties on interacting with people with mental illness and no. 6 where they

have a fear of being romantically involved towards someone with mental

illness. In terms of the domain of unpredictability, the items having the highest

mean scores were items no. 9 which means they believe that the behaviors of

people with mental illness is considered to be unpredictable, no. 11 or their

belief that when they are with someone with mental illness, they fail to predict

its behavior and no. 12 or their belief that there is a possibility that people with

mental illness may do unexpected things. In terms of the domain of

authoritarianism, the items having the highest mean scores were items no. 15

where they do not believe that people with mental illness should be given

freedom to do things, no. 16 or their belief that people with mental illness

should be forced for a treatment and no. 19 which means they believe that

society must limit the freedom being given to people with mental illness.

Lastly, in terms of the domain of malevolence, the items having the highest

means score were items no. 22 or the belief that people with mental illness

are just avoiding the difficulties of life, no. 23 or the belief that people with

mental illness are genetically inferior and no. 25 which states that people with

mental illness should support themselves and not expect help.

8. When it comes to the items that had the highest mean scores per domain, for

the employees, in terms of the domain of fear were items no. 3 where they

feel that they cannot relax when they are around someone with mental illness,

no. 5 meaning they experience difficulties on interacting with people with

mental illness and no. 6 where they have a fear of being romantically involved
 46

towards someone with mental illness. In terms of the domain of

unpredictability, the items having the highest mean scores were items no. 9

which means they believe that the behaviors of people with mental illness is

considered to be unpredictable, no. 11 or their belief that when they are with

someone with mental illness, they fail to predict its behavior and no. 12 or

their belief that there is a possibility that people with mental illness may do

unexpected things. In terms of the domain of authoritarianism, the items

having the highest mean scores were items no. 15 where they do not believe

that people with mental illness should be given freedom to do things, no. 16

or their belief that people with mental illness should be forced for a treatment

and no. 19 which means they believe that society must limit the freedom

being given to people with mental illness. Lastly, in terms of the domain of

malevolence, the items having the highest means score were items no. 22 or

the belief that people with mental illness are just avoiding the difficulties of

life, no. 23 or the belief that people with mental illness are genetically inferior

and no. 25 which states that people with mental illness should support

themselves and not expect help.

Overall, the presence of prejudice towards people with mental illness among

the respondents within Cavite State University-Imus Campus can be described as

somehow to be minimal as it is being reflected in their low mean scores. Yet,

regardless of the outcome of the survey, the researchers continued and proceed with

the module development as this study's main objective is to develop modules for

psychoeducational program that can help in raising awareness on mental health and

removing the stigma and prejudice that surrounds the concept of mental health and

mental illness.

Recommendations

With the results of the study, the researchers emphasize the following

recommendations:
 47

For the people with mental illness, it is highly recommended that above all,

one must honor its own feelings. Accept what you are feeling and avoid thinking that

having mental illness makes you less of a person. Be open with the idea of being

helped by your family, friends, and mental health professionals as it can really lessen

the burden you feel. Know that you are not alone with this battle and always have a

positive outlook in life and belief that there is always a brighter side behind

everything, behind these burdens, behind these mental illness, because there really

is.

For the students, always be aware of your own feelings. Especially that

dealing with college life can sometimes be stressful; you must be able to know and

be aware of what your body needs, physically and emotionally, as having these two

aspects being taken care of equally will often result to a better academic

performance and a sound mental health. Also, always be sensitive with your

classmates. One does not simply know what someone is going through, always

check on them. Offer help with the best of what you can.

For the teachers, to be more flexible with the demands they impose and

always take in consideration the mental health of their students. True that part of

being a student is being able to manage your time, handle stress and be able to meet

the deadlines, but for some students, too much responsibility can be overwhelming.

After all, it is the learning of the students that must be the utmost priority which can

be difficult if they have a poor mental health.

For Cavite State University-Imus Campus, it is recommended to open the

university for more seminars, trainings and workshops with regards to mental health

involving the students and employees to open their minds, to be more aware, and to

be knowledgeable about the concept of mental health and mental illness.

For the future participants of this study, it is important to note that before

considering taking in part with this study, their commitment with this study as this

study will take at least hours of their time and will be implemented at different dates.
 48

It is important to fulfill your part as participants as it can have a great impact on the

results of the study.

For the Human Resource Development Office, to use the results of the survey

in their development of guidelines and policies particularly the item analysis part of

the study as it involves the different areas and factors regarding mental health that

must be addressed. The modules from this study can also be used and implemented

to the employees as part of their actions to be taken regarding the reduction of

prejudice towards people with mental illness in the workplace.

For the Office of the Guidance and Counseling, the modules created from this

study can also be used for implementation to the students. It is highly recommended

to have strict policies when it comes to the selection of the participants as the whole

implementation can be time consuming, as well as a strict schedule of activities that

must be followed.

For the parents, to be always be one of the foundations of our society in

raising mental health awareness. To always guide their children especially when it

comes to their own mental health and to make themselves knowledgeable regarding

mental health and be the first to enlighten their children on the proper way of

interacting and dealing with people with mental illness.

For the local government units, to allocate budget and provide more visible

mental health facilities in the communities. It is also recommended to conduct

seminars to raise the awareness among their people when it comes to mental health

and to reduce the stigma and prejudice surrounding mental illness.

For the future researchers who will continue this particular study, it is highly

recommended that before pursuing this study to have the draft modules constructed

by the researchers to be validated by experts such as registered psychometricians

and psychologists, guidance counselors and other professionals whose line of work

is mostly exposed to the idea and concepts of mental health. Future researchers

must also be careful with the implementation of modules, particularly to have

 49

timetable of activities, a strict guidelines and schedule must be followed for a better

effectivity and efficiency of the modules. Also, always consider the availability of the

participants especially the employees. Again, a strict schedule must be imposed so

that each employee will be able to participate in the module implementation.

 50

REFERENCES

American Psychiatric Association (2013). What is mental illness? Retrieved

November 1, 2019 from https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/what-is-
mental-illness

Biggs, D. et, al. (2010). Employer and employment agency attitudes towards
employing individuals with mental health needs. Journal of Mental Health, 19:
509-516.

Bullen, P. (2014). How to choose a sample size (for the statistically challenged).
Retrieved November 2, 2019 from http://www.tools4dev.org/resources/how-
to-choose-a-sample-size/

Cambridge Dictionary (2019). Prejudice. Retrieved November 2, 2019 from

https://www.google.com/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/us/amp/english/prejudice

Canadian Mental Health Association (2019). Understanding mental illness. Retrieved

November 2, 2019 from https://cmha.ca/mental-health/understanding-mental-
illness

Celine, T. (2014). A study on mental disorders: 5-year retrospective study. Retrieved

November 1, 2019 from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4005192/

Cherry, K. (2019). How people's prejudice develop. Retrieved November 1, 2019

from https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-prejudice-2795476

Cliffs Notes (2016). Prejudice and discrimination. Retrieved November 2, 2019 from
https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/sociology/race-and-ethnicity/
prejudice-and-discrimination

Davey, G. (2013). Mental health and stigma. Retrieved November 2, 2019 from
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/why-we-worry/201308/mental-
health-stigma

Cleofas, J. (2019). Student involvement, mental health and quality of life of college
students in a selected university in Manila, Philippines, International Journal
of Adolescence and Youth, DOI: 10.1080/02673843.2019.1670683

Dewa, C. (2014). Worker attitudes towards mental health problems and disclosure.
Int J Occup Environ Med 2014;5:175-186.

Dietrich, S., Mergl, R., Rummnel-Kluge, C. (2014). Personal and perceived

stigmatization of depression: A comparison of data from the general
population, participants of a depression congress and job placement officers
in Germany. Psychiatry Research, 220: 598-603.

Follmer, K. & Jones, K. (2016). Mental illness in the workplace: An interdisciplinary

review and organizational research agenda. Retrieved November 2, 2019
from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0149206317741194
 51

Gnanaguruvammal,G. (2010). Knowledge and attitude towards mental illness among

teachers in the selected schools in sivagangai district, tamilnadu. Retrieved
November 2, 2019 from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3a24/c5ef849a5a187496e41eb391325a06d5
1f41.pdf

Good Therapy (2019). Prejudice and discrimination. Retrieved November 2, 2019

from https://www.goodtherapy.org/learn-about-therapy/issues/prejudice-
discrimination

Gulliver, A., Griffiths, K. & Christensen, H. (2012). Barriers and facilitators to mental
health help-seeking for young elite athletes: a qualitative study. Retrieved
November 2, 2019 from
https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-244X-12-157

Gunningham, B. (2018). Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness: Measurement,

Structure and Antecedents in Mental Health Professionals and the General
Population. Master's Thesis. Australian National University

Gutierrez, A. (2018). How to get the most out of employees who are dealing with
mental health issues. Retrieved November 2, 2019 from
https://www.esquiremag.ph/culture/lifestyle/how-to-handle-employees-with-
mental-health-problems-a00225-20180525

Hauck, K., Chard, G. (2009). How do employees and managers perceive depression:
A worksite case study. Work, 33: 13-22.

Kenny, A., Bizumic, B. & Griffiths, K.M. (2018). The Prejudice towards People with
Mental Illness (PPMI) scale: structure and validity. BMC Psychiatry 18, 293
(2018) doi:10.1186/s12888-018-1871-z

Khan Academy (2019). Examples of discrimination in society today. Retrieved

November 2, 2019 from
https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/individuals-and-society/
discrimination/a/examples-of-discrimination-in-society-today

Lally J., Samaniego R. & Tully J. (2019). Mental health legislation in the Philippines:
the Philippine Mental Health Act. BJPsych International, in press. Retrieved
November 28, 2019 from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6646843/

Ligneul, R. & Dreher, J. (2017). Social dominance representations in the human

brain. Retrieved November 1, 2019 from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/social-dominance

Mayo Clinic (2019). Mental illness. Retrieved November 1, 2019 from

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/mental-illness/symptoms-
causes/syc-20374968

Medenilla, S., Ordinario, C. & Manawis, R. (2019). Phl confronts costs, effects of
issues on mental health. Retrieved November 1, 2019 from
https://businessmirror.com.ph/2019/09/05/phl-confronts-costs-effects-of-
issues-on-mental-health/
 52

Mental Health Foundation of New Zealand (2014). Young people's experience of

discrimination in relation to mental health issues in Aotearoa New Zealand:
Remove the barriers for our young people from yesterday, today and
tomorrow. Auckland, New Zealand: Mental Health Foundation of New
Zealand

Nakayama, T., Amagasa, T. (2004). Special reference to employee knowledge about

depression and suicide: Baseline results of a workplace-based mental health
support program. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 58: 280-284.

Nickolas, S. (2019). How stratified random sampling works. Retrieved November 2,

2019 from https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/032615/what-are-
some-examples-stratified-random-sampling.asp

Pratto, F. & Stewart A. (2011). Social dominance theory. Retrieved November 1,

2019 from
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9780470672532.wbepp253

Punay, E. (2019). 3.3 million pinoys suffer from depression. Retrieved November 28,
2019 from https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/08/29/1947360/33-
million-pinoys-suffer-depression

Sage, C., Brooks, S., Jones, N. & Greenberg, N. (2016). Attitudes toward mental
health and help-seeking in railway workers. Occupational Medicine, 66: 118-
121.

Samson, M. (2018). How mental health act affects employees. Retrieved November
2, 2019 from https://www.bworldonline.com/how-the-mental-health-act-
affects-employees/

Scheid T. (2005). Stigma as a barrier to employment: mental disability and the

Americans with Disabilities Act. Int J Law Psychiat 2005;28:670–90.
doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2005.04.003

Shuttleworth, M (2008). Descriptive research design. Retrieved November 2, 2019

from https://explorable.com/descriptive-research-design

Tugade, R. (2017). We need to talk about mental illness in the Philippines. Retrieved
November 1, 2019 from
https://cnnphilippines.com/life/culture/2017/04/25/mental-illness-stigma.html

Tuliao A. & Velasquez P. (2014). Revisiting the general help seeking questionnaire:
adaptation, exploratory factor analysis, and further validation in a Filipino
College Student sample. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 47, 1–17.

Uçok A, Brohan E, Rose D. (2011). Anticipated discrimination among people with

schizophrenia. Acta Psychiat Scand 2012;125:77–83. doi:10.1111/j.1600-
0447.2011.01772.x

United Nations (2018). Prejudice and discrimination: Barriers to social inclusion.

Retrieved November 1, 2019 from
https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/2018/02/prejudice-and-
discrimination/
 53

Vescio, T. & Weaver, K. (2017). Prejudice and stereotyping. Retrieved November 2,

2019 from https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-
9780199828340/obo-9780199828340-0097.xml

YMCA (2016). A report investigating the stigma faced by young people experiencing
mental health difficulties. Retrieved November 2, 2019 from
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.ymca.o
rg.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/IAMWHOLE-
v1.1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjWid3G1OHlAhULFogKHWklAnIQFjAAegQIAhAB&u
sg=AOvVaw0rFUvQAaYfKc8-cJuDq9dG
 54

APPENDICES
 55

Appendix 1. Research Instrument

INFORMED CONSENT

Dear Respondents,

We are presently conducting a research study entitled, “Level of Prejudice towards People with
Mental Illness: Module Development for Psychoeducational Program” in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Psychology at Cavite State University – Imus
Campus.

Participants
The respondents of the study will be the students and employees of Cavite State University-Imus
Campus for A.Y. 2019-2020. A total of four hundred (400) students will be selected from the total
population of the students to be the respondents for the data gathering. While for the employees, all
employees will be included whether it is from academic or non-academic department.

Risks and discomforts

The risks of this study are your time and other things that the research will consume for conducting
the study. Some of the topics and questions in the survey may also upset you. You may decline to
answer any or all questions and you may terminate your involvement at any time if you choose.

Potential benefits
Some benefits you can directly get by participating in this study would be primarily to gain more
knowledge regarding the concept of mental health; and if the study has been done, the modules that
will be developed from this study can help you even wider your understanding regarding mental
health.

Utilization of the Results of this study

The data and results that will be gathered from this study will be used by the proponents solely for the
purpose of module development. The said modules regarding prejudice towards people with mental
illness can then be used by the university's Office of the Guidance and Counseling and Human
Resource Department for implementation to the students and employees.

Protection of confidentiality
Every effort will be made by the researcher to preserve your confidentiality including assigning code
names/numbers for participants that will be used on all researcher notes and documents, notes, and
transcribed data and any other identifying participant information will be kept in a locked file cabinet in
the personal possession of the researcher. When no longer necessary for research, all materials will
be destroyed. Lastly information from this research will be used solely for the purpose of this study
and any publications that may result from this study. All other participants involved in this study will
not be identified and their anonymity will be maintained.

Voluntary participation
Your participation in this study is voluntary. It is up to you to decide whether or not to take part in this
study. If you do decide to take part in this study, you will be asked to sign a consent form and you are
still free to withdraw at any time, just kindly approach the researcher. You are free to not answer any
question or questions if you choose.

In this regard, may I request you to please serve as a respondent in this study by answering the
attached rating scale. Rest assured that all information gathered will be treated with utmost care and
confidentiality.

Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Sincerely yours,

Ma. Daniella Camille E. Danas Antonio C. Trespeses II

Researcher Researcher
 56

The Prejudice towards People with Mental Illness (PPMI) Scale

Name:
Age:
Gender:
Student: _____ (Course & Level:____________________________________)
Academic Staff: _____ Non-academic – Staff: _____
(Department: ___________________________________)

Instructions:
The following items deal with various ways you may think or feel about people with mental illness. A
mental illness or disorder is a diagnosable illness which significantly interferes with an individual’s
thoughts, emotions, behavior, and/or social relationships. There are many different types of mental
illness including depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, and personality disorders.

Here we are interested in your views and beliefs about people with mental illness in general.

Please read each question carefully and answer as honestly as you can, using the following scale:
-4: Very strongly disagree 1: Slightly Disagree
-3: Strongly disagree 2: Agree
-2: Disagree- 3: Strongly Agree
1: Slightly disagree 4: Very Strongly Agree
0: Unsure/neutral
Very
Strongl Strongly Slightly Unsure Slight Very
Dis Strongly
Statements y Disagre
agree
Disagre / ly Agree
Agree
Strongly
Disagr e e Neutral Agree Agree
ee
1. I would find it
hard to talk to
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
someone who has
a mental illness
2. I would be just as
happy to invite a
person with mental
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
illness into my
home as I would
anyone else
3. I would feel
relaxed if I had to
talk to someone -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
who was mentally
ill
4. I am not scared
of people with -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
mental illness
5. In general, it is
easy to interact
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
with someone who
has mental illness
6. I would be less
likely to become
romantically
involved with -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
someone if I knew
they were mentally
ill
7. It is best to
avoid people who -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
have mental illness
8. I would feel unsafe
being around
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
someone who is
mentally ill
 57

9. The behaviour of
people with mental
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
illness is
unpredictable
Very
Strongly Slightly Unsure Slight Very
Strongly Dis Strongly
Statements Disagre
Disagre
agree
Disagre / ly Agree
Agree
Strongly
e e Neutral Agree Agree
e
10. The
behaviour of
people with mental
illness is just as -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
predictable as that
of people who are
mentally healthy
11. In general,
you cannot predict
how people with -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
mental illness will
behave
12. People with
mental illness
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
often do
unexpected things
13. I usually find
people with
mental illness to -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
be consistent in
their behavior
14. People with
mental illness
behave in ways -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
that are
foreseeable
15. People who
are mentally ill
should be free to -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
make their own
decisions
16. People
who are mentally
ill should be -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
forced to have
treatment
17. Those who
have serious
mental illness
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
should not be
allowed to have
children
18. People who
are mentally ill
should be allowed -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
to live their life
any way they want
20. Society does
not have a right to
limit the freedom -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
of people with
mental illness
21. We, as a
society, should be
spending much
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
more money on
helping people
with mental illness
22. People
who are mentally
ill are avoiding the -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
difficulties of
everyday life
23. People -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
who develop
mental illness are
genetically inferior
 58

to other people
24. People
with mental illness
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
do not deserve our
sympathy
Very
Strongly Slightly Unsure Slight Very
Strongly Dis Strongly
Statements Disagre
Disagre
agree
Disagre / ly Agree
Agree
Strongly
e e Neutral Agree Agree
e
25. People
with mental illness
should support
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
themselves and
not expect
handouts
26. People who
become mentally
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
ill are not failures
in life
27. We need to
support and care
for people who -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
become mentally
ill
28. Under certain
circumstances,
anyone can -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
experience mental
illness

CONFORME

This is to give my consent for participation as respondent of the research entitled “Prejudice
towards People with Mental Illness: Module Development for Psychoeducational Program”
conducted by Ms. Ma. Daniella Camille E. Danas and Mr. Antonio C. Trespeses II, fourth year
students of Cavite State University – Imus Campus. I have carefully read the cover letter and
fully understand the purpose of the research. I clearly understand that my participation is
voluntary and I am willing to provide the necessary information as accurate as I can that will
help meet the goal of this research.

I am aware that my identity as a respondent shall never be divulged in any phase of the data
gathering process and the reporting of the results.

Full Name: ____________________________________________________

Signature: ___________________________
Email/Contact Details:______________________________________________

Date: ____________________________