
Messaging in Biological Psychiatry: Misrepresentations, Their Causes, and Potential Consequences
Author(s) -
Estelle Dumas-Mallet,
François Go
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
harvard review of psychiatry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.242
H-Index - 78
eISSN - 1465-7309
pISSN - 1067-3229
DOI - 10.1097/hrp.0000000000000276
Subject(s) - reductionism , conceptualization , affect (linguistics) , mental health , psychology , mass media , essentialism , public health , mental illness , discipline , psychiatry , medicine , sociology , epistemology , political science , social science , artificial intelligence , anthropology , philosophy , nursing , communication , computer science , law
Most experts in the field of psychiatry recognize that neuroscience advances have yet to be translated into clinical practice. The main message delivered to laypeople, however, is that mental disorders are brain diseases cured by scientifically designed medications. Here we describe how this misleading message is generated. We summarize the academic studies describing how biomedical observations are often misrepresented in the scientific literature through various forms of data embellishment, publication biases favoring initial and positive studies, improper interpretations, and exaggerated conclusions. These misrepresentations also affect biological psychiatry and are spread through mass media documents. Exacerbated competition, hyperspecialization, and the need to obtain funding for research projects might drive scientists to misrepresent their findings. Moreover, journalists are unaware that initial studies, even when positive and promising, are inherently uncertain. Journalists preferentially cover them and almost never inform the public when those studies are disconfirmed by subsequent research. This explains why reductionist theories about mental health often persist in mass media even though the scientific claims that have been put forward to support them have long been contradicted. These misrepresentations affect the care of patients. Indeed, studies show that a neuro-essentialist conceptualization of mental disorders negatively affects several aspects of stigmatization, reduces the chances of patients' healing, and overshadows psychotherapeutic and social approaches that have been found effective in alleviating mental suffering. Public information about mental health should avoid these reporting biases and give equal consideration to the biological, psychological, and social aspects of mental health.