The relationship between implicit and explicit stigma of mental illness among mental health clinicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: Mental health clinicians have been found to demonstrate stigma towards people with mental illness through both implicit and explicit methodologies. These are thought to represent distinct yet potentially related dimensions of stigma. However, the association between implicit and explicit stigma is unclear, limiting our understanding of how these could impact clinical outcomes.
Aim: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesise research on the relation between implicit and explicit stigma among mental health clinicians and examine its potential moderators.
Methods: The protocol was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42024614725). A systematic search was conducted using PsycINFO, PsycArticles, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ProQuest Central, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus. A random-effects meta-analysis of r-to-z transformed correlations was conducted along with tests of heterogeneity, moderators and publication bias. The features of implicit and explicit measures, methodological quality and clinical outcomes were also extracted.
Results: Ten studies (n = 1,404 clinicians) with 11 independent samples were included. There was a statistically significant, but small, positive pooled correlation between implicit and explicit stigma measures (r = 0.13; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.23). Heterogeneity was moderate and largely accounted for by studies examining substance use disorder, which showed a slightly stronger correlation (r = 0.27) than for other psychiatric disorders (r = 0.08). Publication bias was not detected.
Conclusions: Implicit and explicit stigma appear to be weakly related, so could be considered largely distinct constructs among clinicians. Findings underscore the importance of addressing implicit and explicit stigma in research and practice, which may inform stigma-reduction efforts.
Related
- Demographic Moderators of the Relationship Between Psychiatric Diagnosis and Functional Capacity in People with Serious Mental Illness
- Pain self-efficacy mediates the relationship between illness perceptions and health-related quality of life in women with endometriosis
- From implicit assumptions to explicit ethics: assessment of normative frameworks in digitalization recommendations in rheumatology
- The pathway analysis of relationship between illness uncertainty, perceived stress, coping strategies, and quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease
- Quantifying Diagnostic Misclassification and Inpatient Mortality Determinants in Scrub Typhus: A Systematic Review and Interaction Meta-Analysis of Acute Undifferentiated Febrile Illness (AUFI) Cohorts in India
BibTeX
@misc{jones2026relationship,
title = {{The relationship between implicit and explicit stigma of mental illness among mental health clinicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis}},
author = {Christopher Jones and Eleftherios Kipoulas and Emma Černis and Dr Peter Beazley},
howpublished = {PsyArXiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.31234/osf.io/cm6ud_v1},
url = {https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/cm6ud_v1/},
note = {CC0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - The relationship between implicit and explicit stigma of mental illness among mental health clinicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Christopher Jones
AU - Eleftherios Kipoulas
AU - Emma Černis
AU - Dr Peter Beazley
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/28
PB - PsyArXiv
DO - 10.31234/osf.io/cm6ud_v1
UR - https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/cm6ud_v1/
AB - Background: Mental health clinicians have been found to demonstrate stigma towards people with mental illness through both implicit and explicit methodologies. These are thought to represent distinct yet potentially related dimensions of stigma. However, the association between implicit and explicit stigma is unclear, limiting our understanding of how these could impact clinical outcomes. Aim: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesise research on the relation between implicit and explicit stigma among mental health clinicians and examine its potential moderators. Methods: The protocol was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42024614725). A systematic search was conducted using PsycINFO, PsycArticles, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ProQuest Central, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus. A random-effects meta-analysis of r-to-z transformed correlations was conducted along with tests of heterogeneity, moderators and publication bias. The features of implicit and explicit measures, methodological quality and clinical outcomes were also extracted. Results: Ten studies (n = 1,404 clinicians) with 11 independent samples were included. There was a statistically significant, but small, positive pooled correlation between implicit and explicit stigma measures (r = 0.13; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.23). Heterogeneity was moderate and largely accounted for by studies examining substance use disorder, which showed a slightly stronger correlation (r = 0.27) than for other psychiatric disorders (r = 0.08). Publication bias was not detected. Conclusions: Implicit and explicit stigma appear to be weakly related, so could be considered largely distinct constructs among clinicians. Findings underscore the importance of addressing implicit and explicit stigma in research and practice, which may inform stigma-reduction efforts.
ER -