Psychiatrists' models of mental illness and their personal backgrounds

Abstract

SYNOPSIS: Seventy-nine junior psychiatrists at the Maudsley Hospital answered 16 biographical questions and a 68-item questionnaire measuring attitudes to the psychoanalytical, biological, social, behavioural, and anti-medical models of mental illness. The psychoanalytical model was the most clearly defined and its adherents the most dogmatic, while those supporting the social model were the most eclectic. Sex, social class, education and political sympathy proved a poor guide to the orientation of the respondent. Individuals who had decided on a career in psychiatry before entering medical school were the most critical of the biological model. Biologically minded psychiatrists were older and, in contrast to Kreitman's findings, there was a shift from a psychoanalytical to a biological preference with increasing psychiatric experience. The importance of scientific attitudes in psychiatry was endorsed by biologically and behaviourally inclined psychiatrists but denigrated by supporters of the analytical approach. Adherents of the psychoanalytical model had as many academic qualifications as the biologically inclined, but had fewer publications and were less active in research. It appears that interest in psychoanalysis is antipathetic to the development of scientific attitudes conducive to research.