While stigmatisation is universal, stigma research in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) is limited. LMIC stigma research predominantly concerns health-related stigma, primarily regarding HIV/AIDS or mental illness from an adult perspective. While there are commonalities in stigmatisation, there are also contextual differences. The aim of this study in DR Congo (DRC), as a formative part in the development of a common stigma reduction intervention, was to gain insight into the commonalities and differences of stigma drivers (triggers of stigmatisation), facilitators (factors positively or negatively influencing stigmatisation), and manifestations (practices and experiences of stigmatisation) with regard to three populations: unmarried mothers, children formerly associated with armed forces and groups (CAAFAG), and an indigenous population. Group exercises, in which participants reacted to statements and substantiated their reactions, were held with the ‘general population’ (15 exercises, n = 70) and ‘populations experiencing stigma’ (10 exercises, n = 48). Data was transcribed and translated, and coded in Nvivo12. We conducted framework analysis. There were two drivers mentioned across the three populations: perceived danger was the most prominent driver, followed by perceived low value of the population experiencing stigma. There were five shared facilitators, with livelihood and personal benefit the most comparable across the populations. Connection to family or leaders received mixed reactions. If unmarried mothers and CAAFAG were perceived to have taken advice from the general population and changed their stereotyped behaviour this also featured as a facilitator. Stigma manifested itself for the three populations at family, community, leaders and services level, with participation restrictions, differential treatment, anticipated stigma and feelings of scapegoating. Stereotyping was common, with different stereotypes regarding the three populations. Although stigmatisation was persistent, positive interactions between the general population and populations experiencing stigma were shared as well. This study demonstrated utility of a health-related stigma and discrimination framework and a participatory exercise for understanding non-health related stigmatisation. Results are consistent with other studies regarding these populations in other contexts. This study identified commonalities between drivers, facilitators and manifestations—albeit with population-specific factors. Contextual information seems helpful in proposing strategy components for stigma reduction.

中文翻译：

---

了解污名化：刚果民主共和国对青少年和成年人的定性形成研究的结果

虽然污名化普遍存在，但在中低收入国家（LMIC）的耻辱研究仍然有限。LMIC污名研究主要涉及与健康相关的污名，主要是从成人角度来看与HIV / AIDS或精神疾病有关。尽管污名化有一些共性，但上下文也有差异。刚果民主共和国（DRC）这项研究的目的是作为减少常见耻辱感干预措施的形成性部分，旨在深入了解耻辱感驱动因素（侮辱的触发因素），促进因素（积极或消极因素）的共性和差异。 （三）有影响的污名化和表现形式（污名化的做法和经验），涉及三个人群：未婚母亲，以前与武装部队和团体有关联的儿童（CAAFAG）和土著居民。小组练习由参与者对陈述做出反应并证实了自己的反应，进行了“一般人群”（15个练习，n = 70）和“有耻辱感的人群”（10个练习，n = 48）。数据被转录和翻译，并在Nvivo12中编码。我们进行了框架分析。在这三个人群中提到了两个驱动因素：感知到的危险是最主要的驱动因素，其次是被认为受到耻辱的人口的低价值。有五个共享的促进者，其生计和个人利益在所有人群中是最可比的。与家人或领导者的联系反应不一。如果未婚母亲和CAAFAG被认为已从一般人群中征求意见，并改变了其刻板印象的行为，则这也可以作为促进者。污名在家庭，社区，领导人和服务级别的三个人群中表现出来，参与受限，差别待遇，预期的污名和替罪羊的感觉。刻板印象很普遍，关于这三个人群的刻板印象不同。尽管污名化持续存在，但普通民众与遭受耻辱的人群之间也存在积极的互动。这项研究证明了与健康有关的污名和歧视框架和参与性练习对于理解与健康无关的污名化的实用性。结果与在其他情况下针对这些人群的其他研究一致。这项研究确定了驱动因素，促进因素和表现形式之间的共性，尽管有特定人群的因素。