{"title":"传染病与精神疾病:风险的社会流行病学(评《商业精神疾病的流行》)","authors":"K. Keyes, Jeffrey Shaman","doi":"10.1177/00018392211067693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In their 2022 paper, Kensbock, Alkærsig, and Lomberg provide compelling evidence of an increased risk in treated depressive, anxiety, and stress-related disorders within workplaces, associated with the introduction of new hires who either have treated disorders themselves or are hired from workplaces with an increased prevalence of treated disorders. The authors interpret these findings as evidence of a “contagion” effect for psychiatric disorders, illustrative of workplace spread of disorder that may affect the mental health of employees. In this commentary, we contextualize these findings through psychiatric epidemiology. The evidence provided by Kensbock and colleagues is consistent with a long history of evidence in psychiatric and social epidemiology illustrating that many health outcomes are affected by those in our social networks and that psychiatric disorders, in particular, evidence spatial and temporal autocorrelation as well as social network spread that can be best conceptualized through well-known infectious disease principles. Thus, there is a large empirical literature that supports the findings of Kensbock, Alkærsig, and Lomberg. That said, the findings should not be overinterpreted; they fit some patterns of previous literature and known facts about psychiatric disorders, but not all. They also must be appropriately situated within the literature on workplace determinants of mental well-being more generally and, in particular, the global movements to situate the rights of workers with mental illness for employment protections and safe working conditions.","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"49 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contagion and Psychiatric Disorders: The Social Epidemiology of Risk (Comment on “The Epidemic of Mental Disorders in Business”)\",\"authors\":\"K. Keyes, Jeffrey Shaman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00018392211067693\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In their 2022 paper, Kensbock, Alkærsig, and Lomberg provide compelling evidence of an increased risk in treated depressive, anxiety, and stress-related disorders within workplaces, associated with the introduction of new hires who either have treated disorders themselves or are hired from workplaces with an increased prevalence of treated disorders. The authors interpret these findings as evidence of a “contagion” effect for psychiatric disorders, illustrative of workplace spread of disorder that may affect the mental health of employees. In this commentary, we contextualize these findings through psychiatric epidemiology. The evidence provided by Kensbock and colleagues is consistent with a long history of evidence in psychiatric and social epidemiology illustrating that many health outcomes are affected by those in our social networks and that psychiatric disorders, in particular, evidence spatial and temporal autocorrelation as well as social network spread that can be best conceptualized through well-known infectious disease principles. Thus, there is a large empirical literature that supports the findings of Kensbock, Alkærsig, and Lomberg. That said, the findings should not be overinterpreted; they fit some patterns of previous literature and known facts about psychiatric disorders, but not all. They also must be appropriately situated within the literature on workplace determinants of mental well-being more generally and, in particular, the global movements to situate the rights of workers with mental illness for employment protections and safe working conditions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7203,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administrative Science Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"67 1\",\"pages\":\"49 - 55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administrative Science Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392211067693\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Science Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392211067693","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Contagion and Psychiatric Disorders: The Social Epidemiology of Risk (Comment on “The Epidemic of Mental Disorders in Business”)
In their 2022 paper, Kensbock, Alkærsig, and Lomberg provide compelling evidence of an increased risk in treated depressive, anxiety, and stress-related disorders within workplaces, associated with the introduction of new hires who either have treated disorders themselves or are hired from workplaces with an increased prevalence of treated disorders. The authors interpret these findings as evidence of a “contagion” effect for psychiatric disorders, illustrative of workplace spread of disorder that may affect the mental health of employees. In this commentary, we contextualize these findings through psychiatric epidemiology. The evidence provided by Kensbock and colleagues is consistent with a long history of evidence in psychiatric and social epidemiology illustrating that many health outcomes are affected by those in our social networks and that psychiatric disorders, in particular, evidence spatial and temporal autocorrelation as well as social network spread that can be best conceptualized through well-known infectious disease principles. Thus, there is a large empirical literature that supports the findings of Kensbock, Alkærsig, and Lomberg. That said, the findings should not be overinterpreted; they fit some patterns of previous literature and known facts about psychiatric disorders, but not all. They also must be appropriately situated within the literature on workplace determinants of mental well-being more generally and, in particular, the global movements to situate the rights of workers with mental illness for employment protections and safe working conditions.
期刊介绍:
Administrative Science Quarterly, under the ownership and management of the Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management at Cornell University, has consistently been a pioneer in organizational studies since the inception of the field. As a premier journal, it consistently features the finest theoretical and empirical papers derived from dissertations, along with the latest contributions from well-established scholars. Additionally, the journal showcases interdisciplinary work in organizational theory and offers insightful book reviews.