Auditory Hallucination Simulation and Mental Health Stigma Among Nursing Students: How Clinical Practicum Experience Differentiates the Predictive Contributions of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviours.

IF 3.3
Seung-Woo Han, Eun-Hee Kim, Hyun-Ok Jung
{"title":"Auditory Hallucination Simulation and Mental Health Stigma Among Nursing Students: How Clinical Practicum Experience Differentiates the Predictive Contributions of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviours.","authors":"Seung-Woo Han, Eun-Hee Kim, Hyun-Ok Jung","doi":"10.1111/inm.70316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Stigmatising beliefs towards people with mental health disorders impede treatment-seeking and recovery. This study examined how the predictive contributions of knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours to stigmatising beliefs towards people with mental health disorders differed by clinical practicum experience among nursing students exposed to auditory hallucination simulation. A non-randomised comparative cross-sectional design was employed (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines). Nursing students (n = 363) from four Korean universities were allocated to groups with (n = 175) and without (n = 188) clinical practicum experience based on academic progression. All participants completed an auditory hallucination simulation programme followed by questionnaires measuring knowledge, attitudes, behaviours, and stigma. Stepwise multiple regression analyses revealed that among students without clinical experience, knowledge (β = -0.435, p < 0.001), attitudes (β = -0.259, p < 0.001), and behaviours (β = -0.144, p = 0.020) predicted stigma (Adjusted R<sup>2</sup> = 0.419). Among students with clinical experience, only knowledge (β = -0.455, p < 0.001) and attitudes (β = -0.287, p < 0.001) predicted stigma (Adjusted R<sup>2</sup> = 0.478); behaviours did not reach significance despite a stronger bivariate correlation in the experienced (r = -0.390) than inexperienced group (r = -0.332). This paradoxical pattern-a stronger zero-order association losing independent variance in the multivariate model-suggests clinical experience integrates the three stigma components such that behaviour's effect becomes fully mediated through knowledge and attitudes. These findings support a stage-sensitive model: direct behavioural strategies are most effective pre-practicum, while post-practicum intervention should prioritise cognitive-affective integration via structured debriefing.</p>","PeriodicalId":94051,"journal":{"name":"International journal of mental health nursing","volume":"35 4","pages":"e70316"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13397399/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of mental health nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.70316","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Stigmatising beliefs towards people with mental health disorders impede treatment-seeking and recovery. This study examined how the predictive contributions of knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours to stigmatising beliefs towards people with mental health disorders differed by clinical practicum experience among nursing students exposed to auditory hallucination simulation. A non-randomised comparative cross-sectional design was employed (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines). Nursing students (n = 363) from four Korean universities were allocated to groups with (n = 175) and without (n = 188) clinical practicum experience based on academic progression. All participants completed an auditory hallucination simulation programme followed by questionnaires measuring knowledge, attitudes, behaviours, and stigma. Stepwise multiple regression analyses revealed that among students without clinical experience, knowledge (β = -0.435, p < 0.001), attitudes (β = -0.259, p < 0.001), and behaviours (β = -0.144, p = 0.020) predicted stigma (Adjusted R2 = 0.419). Among students with clinical experience, only knowledge (β = -0.455, p < 0.001) and attitudes (β = -0.287, p < 0.001) predicted stigma (Adjusted R2 = 0.478); behaviours did not reach significance despite a stronger bivariate correlation in the experienced (r = -0.390) than inexperienced group (r = -0.332). This paradoxical pattern-a stronger zero-order association losing independent variance in the multivariate model-suggests clinical experience integrates the three stigma components such that behaviour's effect becomes fully mediated through knowledge and attitudes. These findings support a stage-sensitive model: direct behavioural strategies are most effective pre-practicum, while post-practicum intervention should prioritise cognitive-affective integration via structured debriefing.

护理学生的幻听模拟与心理健康污名:临床实习经验如何区分知识、态度和行为的预测贡献。
对精神健康障碍患者的污名化信念阻碍了寻求治疗和康复。本研究考察了在接触幻听模拟的护理学生的临床实习经历中,知识、态度和行为对精神健康障碍患者污名化信念的预测作用。采用非随机比较横断面设计(加强流行病学指南中观察性研究的报告)。来自韩国四所大学的护理专业学生(n = 363)根据学业进展分为有(n = 175)和没有(n = 188)临床实习经历的两组。所有参与者都完成了幻听模拟程序,随后进行了知识、态度、行为和耻辱感的问卷调查。逐步多元回归分析显示,无临床经验的学生在临床知识方面的差异(β = -0.435, p 2 = 0.419)。在有临床经验的学生中,仅有知识(β = -0.455, p 2 = 0.478);尽管经验组(r = -0.390)比经验组(r = -0.332)具有更强的双变量相关性,但行为没有达到显著性。这种矛盾的模式——在多变量模型中更强的零级关联失去了独立方差——表明临床经验整合了三种病耻感成分,这样行为的影响就完全通过知识和态度来调节。这些发现支持一个阶段敏感模型:直接行为策略在实习前是最有效的,而实习后的干预应该通过结构化的汇报来优先考虑认知-情感整合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书