ABSTRACT

Candidates for high office in the United States play an important role in determining the political agenda and shaping public and mass media understanding of which issues should receive attention. Critics contend politicians rarely address mental health, despite the importance of the federal government in ensuring Americans access to quality care. Two studies sought to understand how candidates for the presidency communicated about mental health using formal (mental, depress, anxiety) and informal (crazy, insane) terminology in social media posts and debates. Two coders examined 1,807 tweets from 41 politicians who competed in the 2016 and 2020 races, plus transcripts from 47 debates during the primaries and General Elections. Politicians often stigmatized mental illness, using mental health-related slang to insult opponents. They afforded less attention to policy and calls for action. The authors offer recommendations for mental health professionals and advocates to encourage politicians to address mental health policy while avoiding stigmatizing language.

摘要

美国高级职位的候选人在确定政治议程和塑造公众和大众媒体对哪些问题应该受到关注的理解方面发挥着重要作用。批评者认为，尽管联邦政府在确保美国人获得优质护理方面很重要，但政客们很少解决心理健康问题。两项研究试图了解总统候选人如何在社交媒体帖子和辩论中使用正式（精神、抑郁、焦虑）和非正式（疯狂、疯狂）术语来交流心理健康。两名编码员检查了来自参加 2016 年和 2020 年竞选的 41 名政客的 1,807 条推文，以及初选和大选期间 47 场辩论的成绩单。政客们经常将精神疾病污名化，使用与精神健康相关的俚语来侮辱对手。他们较少关注政策和行动呼吁。作者为精神卫生专业人员和倡导者提供建议，以鼓励政客解决精神卫生政策，同时避免污名化语言。