The Effects of Peer Mental Illness Narratives on Reducing Stigma Among US Marginalized College Students

Mental health stigma remains a significant barrier to accessing mental health care and treatment, particularly among racial, ethnic, gender, and LGBTQIA+ underrepresented groups in the United States. This study aimed to investigate the relative persuasiveness of mental health narratives featuring both marginalized and non-marginalized characters in reducing stigma among college students. We conducted an online between-subjects experiment with a sample size of 292 participants to explore the impacts of message format (narrative vs. non-narrative), narrative point of view (first-person vs. third-person), and character similarity (marginalized vs. non-marginalized voices) on the persuasion process, specifically targeting the reduction of stigma and changes in attitudes toward those seeking mental health services. Findings revealed that the use of narrative messaging had no effect on reducing mental health stigma or treatment attitudes, but narrative campaigns featuring members of underrepresented groups did enhance one's perceived similarity with mediated characters, which in turn resulted in more support for seeking mental health treatment. These findings have implications for the design of social media-based anti-stigma interventions and narrative persuasion in mental health research.