Skip to main content

Table 3 Predictors of Improved RIBS Score (binary yes/no) (n = 83)

From: Mass social contact interventions and their effect on mental health related stigma and intended discrimination

 

Individual social contact elements

Individual social contact elements

Individual social contact elements

Individual social contact elements

Additive social contact

OR(95% CI)

OR(95% CI)

OR(95% CI)

OR(95% CI)

OR(95% CI)

Age

1.1 (1.0, 1.1)

1.1 (1.0, 1.1)

1.1(1.0, 1.1)

1.1 (1.0, 1.1)

1.1 (1.0, 1.1)

Gender

1.5 (0.2, 9.9)

2.0 (0.3, 2.8)

1.6 (0.2, 0.7)

1.8 (0.3, 2.7)

1.6 (0.2, 1.0)

BME

5.6 (1.0, 31.5)

6.1 (1.1, 33.3)

6.7 (1.1, 9.2)

6.0 (1.1, 3.1)

6.1 (1.1, 4.5)

Experience of Mental Health Problems (yes/no)

2.0 (0.4, 10.0)

2.7 (0.5, 13.6)

2.5 (0.5, 12.4)

2.1 (0.4, 10.8)

2.3 (0.5, 11.6)

Facilitating Social contact Factorsa

     

 Equal Status Common

2.4 (0.7, 7.7)

--

--

--

--

 Goals

--

2.0 (0.9, 4.7)

--

--

--

 Intergroup cooperation

--

--

*2.5 (1.1, 5.9)

--

--

 Friendship potential

--

--

--

2.8 (0.6, 11.8)

--

Quality of Social contact (Number of factors)

--

--

--

--

*1.4 (1.0, 1.8)

Initial RIBS Score

1.0 (0.8, 1.3)

1.0 (0.8, 1.3)

1.0 (0.8, 1.3)

1.0 (0.8, 1.3)

1.0 (0.8, 1.3)

Initial willingness to disclose

1.0 (0.6, 1.5)

1.0 (0.6, 1.5)

1.0 (0.6, 1.5)

1.0 (0.6, 1.5)

1.0 (0.6, 1.5)

  1. p < 0.05
  2. afacilitating social contact conditions refer tothe specific conditions theorised by Allport and Pettigrew as being associated with optimal social contact